Re: Why use C++?

[Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>]

"Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> wrote:

> Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> > "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I didn't say it was. I said it probably arose from that. I'll bet
> >> integer literals are signed in most assembly languages (going out on
> >> a limb with this, because I really don't know).
> >
> > Absolutely not.
> 
> Liar.

Dumb jerkoff.

> > Assembly language is about talking to the machine
> > directly. If you can't manipulate native types then your assembler
> > isn't an assembler.
> >
> 
> Pedantic "discussion" is annoying to me, so curb it.

I really don't care what's annoying to you or not. This is usenet, if you
don't like it, go fuck yourself. Nobody will miss you.

> >> Hence, a no-brainer translation of  HLL code to assembly
> >> (recognizing, of course, that compilers are free to generate machine
> >> code directly, rather than generating assembly).
> >
> > Most (vast majority) of the compilers on IBM platforms generate object
> > code.
> 
> Their loss! ;)

Wrong again, shit-for-brains. They've been doing it before your mom had the
ten or so guys who could claim they were your father.


> Says the adolescent with dick in hand.

Better than being you, the guy sucking somebody else's adolescent dick.