home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Path: sparky!uunet!titan!lpi!pkt
- From: pkt@lpi.liant.com (Scott Turner)
- Subject: Re: pointer comparisons
- Message-ID: <1993Jan7.145511.718@lpi.liant.com>
- Sender: pkt@lpi (Scott Turner)
- Organization: Liant Software Corporation
- References: <1992Dec31.170223.21637@lpi.liant.com> <1993Jan05.003819.12515@microsoft.com> <1993Jan5.203237.28304@lpi.liant.com> <1993Jan06.194710.6913@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 14:55:11 GMT
- Lines: 24
-
- In article <1993Jan06.194710.6913@microsoft.com>, jimad@microsoft.com (Jim Adcock) writes:
- > In article <1993Jan5.203237.28304@lpi.liant.com> pkt@lpi.liant.com (Scott Turner) writes:
- > |Yes. An _other_ object is distinct, not identical to the object with which
- > |it shares storage.
- >
- > I still don't understand your [undefined] concepts of "distinctness"
- > and "identity"
-
- I suspect the definition wouldn't matter to our issues of pointer comparison.
-
- Also, I'm hesitant to try to define identity of objects. The fundamental
- semantics of a programming language are typically specified by their
- (1) operation, (2) denotation, or (3) axiomatically. In (1) and (2) you
- start with a rigorous framework, which we don't even have an inkling of
- for C++. In (3) you don't define the fundamentals, you specify how to
- reason about them.
-
- Identity of objects is more of the essence than storage, so it would be
- problematic to define the former in terms of the latter.
- --
- Prescott K. Turner, Jr.
- Liant Software Corp. (developers of LPI languages)
- 959 Concord St., Framingham, MA 01701 USA (508) 872-8700
- UUCP: uunet!lpi!pkt Internet: pkt@lpi.liant.com
-