From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,f51e93dacd9c7fca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2002-06-18 01:16:32 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!news.tele.dk!small.news.tele.dk!194.25.134.62!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!newsfeed01.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!news6-win.server.ntlworld.com.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "chris.danx" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada References: <3d0ce154_5@news.bluewin.ch> Subject: Re: status of Ada STL? X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:16:05 +0100 NNTP-Posting-Host: 80.5.140.234 X-Complaints-To: abuse@ntlworld.com X-Trace: news6-win.server.ntlworld.com 1024388191 80.5.140.234 (Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:16:31 BST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2002 09:16:31 BST Organization: ntl Cablemodem News Service Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:26214 Date: 2002-06-18T09:16:05+01:00 List-Id: "Russ" <18k11tm001@sneakemail.com> wrote in message news:bebbba07.0206172212.4bc5cc3a@posting.google.com... > By the way, it's too bad that Ada wasted "/=" on "not equals. It would > be very useful for dividing a matrix by a scalar. For example, the > construct > > A := A / 2.0; > > is very inefficient because a temporary matrix must be created to > store A/2, then an assignment must be used to put the result back in > A. On the other hand, > the construct > > A /= 2.0 > > is not only much cleaner looking, it is much more efficient because > you can skip the temporary matrix and the assignment. And please don't > argue with me here, because you will only be showing your ignorance. > Good C++ programmers know all about this. I'm not going to argue with you (you've made up your mind and so have I, what's the point?), I'm just curious as to whether compilers would see A := A / 2 and think "that code's dividing the matrix by 2 and assigning it to itself. It might be better just to divide it inplace" leading to the same thing. But then I'm largely ignorant of compilers. Chris