From: "David C. Hoos, Sr." <david.c.hoos.sr@ada95.com>
Subject: Re: Function name problem
Date: 2000/01/16
Date: 2000-01-16T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <N7qg4.18$4R4.1827@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 85stib$a2g1@news.cis.okstate.edu
David Starner <dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu> wrote in message
news:85stib$a2g1@news.cis.okstate.edu...
> On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 12:37:21 +0100, Harald Schmidt
<Harald.Schmidt@tomcat.de> wrote:
> >in article 85qecu$24r$1@nnrp1.deja.com, Jeff Carter at
> >jrcarter001@my-deja.com wrote on 15.01.2000 19:30:
> >
<snip>
> it. If I could use Unicode in writing programs, I can see a few places
> where mathematical symbols would make nice operators, but still,
> a {dot symbol} b and a {cross symbol} b aren't superior enough to
> Dot(a,b) and Cross (a, b) to make the precidence and readibility
> problems worth it.
Beside which, the parameter/return type profiles of dot product and
cross product are unique, so you can just use the "*" operator
for these.
<snip>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2000-01-16 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2000-01-15 0:00 Function name problem Harald Schmidt
2000-01-15 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
2000-01-15 0:00 ` Pascal Obry
2000-01-15 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
2000-01-16 0:00 ` Harald Schmidt
2000-01-16 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
2000-01-16 0:00 ` Harald Schmidt
2000-01-16 0:00 ` Gautier
2000-01-17 0:00 ` Matthew Heaney
2000-01-26 0:00 ` Florian Weimer
2000-01-16 0:00 ` David Starner
2000-01-16 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. [this message]
2000-01-16 0:00 ` David Starner
2000-01-18 0:00 ` Howard W. LUDWIG
2000-01-16 0:00 ` David A. Cobb
2000-01-16 0:00 ` David Starner
2000-01-17 0:00 ` David A. Cobb
2000-01-17 0:00 ` David Starner
2000-01-17 0:00 ` Jeff Carter
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox