01:02:14 yay,. found the bug :) 01:09:35 yay 01:09:40 what was it? 01:10:11 bad peek function 01:11:04 unique unary works great.. need to put in some lookahead for +/- (to decide whether it is minus or negation, etC) 01:11:50 ah 01:25:14 cool 01:25:28 I hope you're writing it in sed? 01:26:08 sorry, not that skilled hehe 01:26:55 postfix ++ has higher precedence than prefix --.. can you guys think of an expression where that matters? 01:29:23 random - a quote I just saw: 01:29:23 "Yow! I've just lost the SOURCE CODE for all my QUINE PROGRAMS! What 01:29:23 will I DO NOW with just the BINARIES?" 01:29:23 -David Madore 03:20:53 -!- calamari_ has quit (Connection timed out). 03:33:01 -!- echo has joined. 07:53:19 I can't, because there are no equivalent-precedence non-unary operators and you can't apply postfix-++ and prefix-'--' to a same object. 07:53:26 oh, he left already. 07:59:59 -!- clog has quit (ended). 08:00:00 -!- clog has joined. 08:12:59 -!- kosmikus|away has changed nick to kosmikus. 08:12:59 -!- Toreun has quit (Read error: 54 (Connection reset by peer)). 09:06:19 -!- echo has left (?). 11:45:54 -!- kosmikus has changed nick to kosmikus|away. 15:52:57 -!- calamari_ has joined. 15:55:21 -!- Keymaker has joined. 15:55:30 hi 16:22:39 hi Keymaker 16:23:05 calamari; 09:49:04 < fizzie> I can't, because there are no equivalent-precedence non-unary operators and you can't apply postfix-++ and prefix-'--' to a same object. 16:23:14 hiya 16:25:43 but with other postfix/prefix operator combinations it obviously matters. 16:26:15 what's postfix/prefix operator? 16:26:59 "combinations of postfix and prefix operators", I mean. 16:27:20 keymaker; you missed the original question, too, I think: 16:27:21 03:22:41 < calamari_> postfix ++ has higher precedence than prefix --.. can you guys think of an expression where that matters? 16:28:25 yeah i missed, well, can't understand anyways... 16:28:43 he's writing that C compiler. 16:28:49 ah ! 16:29:30 C has funky precedence rules anyway. 16:30:54 why do bitwise shift operators have higher precedence than the comparison operators (<, >, ==, !=) while the bitwise ands, ors and xors don't? 16:31:47 fizzie: I asked in C and was forcefully enlightened :) 16:31:49 err #c 16:32:07 mhmm? 16:32:25 *a++ vs *++a 16:33:05 or actually, even a++ vs ++a.. they return different values 16:33:36 well sure, their only difference is in the value they return. 16:35:29 but maybe I understand the reasoning with the postincrement thing, it'd be funny to have *++a behave like "*(++a)" and *a++ behave like "(*a)++". 16:36:38 what I don't understand is the lowness of the bitwise operators. I'd think "if(a & b == c)" would more often mean "if((a & b) == c)" (when using bitmasks for example) than what it currently means, "if(a & (b == c))" 16:36:57 uh, iirc, that is. 16:37:03 maybe I should test just in case. 16:38:34 1 & 2 == 2: 1 16:38:34 (1 & 2) == 2: 0 16:38:34 1 & (2 == 2): 1 16:38:43 stupid it is. 16:39:31 I still need a good bf way of doing bitwise operators 16:39:59 that's like asking a good intercal way of doing arithmetic operations, only worse. 16:40:05 yeah 16:40:30 the "best" way I know of right now is expanding to binary then going back.. horribly slow and memory wasting 16:41:52 for now I'll just leave 'em out 16:42:34 I think I needs to go work->home now. away for a while. 16:42:50 cya.. thanks for the fresh insight :) 16:47:08 ok bye 17:06:11 back. 17:06:22 welcome :) 17:24:39 -!- edwinb has quit (Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)). 17:27:36 -!- edwinb has joined. 17:35:04 ..i'm away for a while.. 17:35:08 -!- Keymaker has quit. 18:48:27 -!- calamari- has joined. 19:03:17 -!- x0r4n0nzx has joined. 19:04:33 -!- calamari_ has quit (Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer)). 19:04:56 -!- x0r4n0nzx has quit (Client Quit). 22:17:50 -!- calamari- has quit (calvino.freenode.net irc.freenode.net). 22:19:33 -!- calamari- has joined. 22:29:00 -!- calamari- has quit (Read error: 110 (Connection timed out)).