From: kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)
Subject: Re: [Q] Portability of <= and >= with real operands
Date: 1996/12/03
Date: 1996-12-03T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1996Dec3.103933.1@eisner> (raw)
In-Reply-To: E1uEEs.2xJ.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com
In article <E1uEEs.2xJ.0.-s@inmet.camb.inmet.com>, stt@houdini.camb.inmet.com (Tucker Taft) writes:
> Are you also saying that X <= Y is somehow "better" than not (X > Y)?
Depending on the context, one form or the other may be _much_ easier
for a human to scan. It all depends upon how X and Y have been used
in the surrounding lines, as well as what the real names are (one hopes
that only those doing graphics or genetics actually name variables
X and Y).
Larry Kilgallen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1996-12-03 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1996-11-29 0:00 [Q] Portability of <= and >= with real operands JP Thornley
1996-11-29 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen [this message]
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-04 0:00 ` Keith Thompson
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Thomas Koenig
1996-12-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1996-12-01 0:00 ` Tucker Taft
1996-12-02 0:00 ` Norman H. Cohen
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox