8 ms·

Are there any other named C++ pseudo-operators? For example, the "clown eyes" operator !! commonly is used to coerce a boolish value to a bool. :)

zem 11y ago
i'd call that the bunny operator because it reminds me of the sanrio bunnies.
im3w1l 11y ago
There is the down-to pseudo-operator --> as in int x = 3; while(x --> 0) { std::cout<<x<<"\n"; }
- repsilat 11y ago
  In addition to the rightward arrow, there's the leftward arrow: int x = 3; while(n <-- x) { cout << x << endl; } which is different because it doesn't include the lower bound `n`. And of course, if typing the ">" is too taxing, the "---" operator is equivalent to the "-->" operator: int x = 3; while(x --- n) { cout << x << endl; } A few more goodies in this style at http://steike.com/code/useless/evil-c/ http://steike.com/code/useless/evil-c/ (home of the zip-quine.)
dustmop 11y ago
A crying face is called "ever" #define ever (;;) for ever { // do something }
mewse 11y ago
In Mac programming (pre-OSX) it was common for the OS to give you memory blocks not using a pointer, but using a 'handle', which under Mac OS<=9 meant "a pointer to a pointer" (where the direct pointer was under OS control so that it could move memory blocks around in low-memory situations. By comparison, a 'handle' in Windows is a "memory block the contents of which you don't know what they are". On Mac OS<=9, you did know the contents; you just had to double-dereference your pointer to reach them) This meant that when accessing data through these handles, you had to write code like this: (*handle)->field; or (**handle).field; Eventually, someone coined a pseudo-operator for reaching fields from a handle without requiring parentheses: handle[0]->field; [0]-> was named the "sproing" operator (on the theory that it indicates the desired value popping out of a box).
- asveikau 11y ago
  > By comparison, a 'handle' in Windows is a "memory block the contents of which you don't know what they are". This is incorrect. In Windows, the HANDLE is a typedef for a void pointer, but its usage is usually 100% analogous to a file descriptor - i.e. it is a token passed to kernel space, where the kernel looks it up in a per-process table of open files. I say "usually" because some components have re-used the HANDLE typedef for things which are not kernel objects - for example the HANDLE that comes from FindFirstFile() is actually a pointer to a structure in user-space [which AFAIK itself has a HANDLE to the directory].
  - ms2 11y ago
    That's true for some handles in Win32, but (since we're talking about classic MacOS) Win16 handles were usually NEAR pointers inside kernel segments.
    - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
      True! That was a disaster; only 64K (16 bits) handles were possible across all processes. Many APIs had to be deprecated and redesigned when it went 32-bit. I've argued for using uuids for handles from here on out. They are endless; no effort to coordinate handle spaces is ever needed; they work locally and on the network; on some architectures they are even a register width scalar.
- rcalhoun 11y ago
  That should be "sprong" not "sproing". I restored Maf Vosburgh's page here: http://textmail.net/sprong/sprong.html http://textmail.net/sprong/sprong.html
caf 11y ago
"clown eyes"? That's the Bugs Bunny operator!
KeytarHero 11y ago
I don't know if it's named, but there's the !!?!!? operator [1] !ErrorHasOccured() ??!??! HandleError(); [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7825055/what-does-the-c-operator-do http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7825055/what-does-the-c-o...

zem 11y ago

i'd call that the bunny operator because it reminds me of the sanrio bunnies.

im3w1l 11y ago

There is the down-to pseudo-operator --> as in int x = 3; while(x --> 0) { std::cout<<x<<"\n"; }

repsilat 11y ago
In addition to the rightward arrow, there's the leftward arrow: int x = 3; while(n <-- x) { cout << x << endl; } which is different because it doesn't include the lower bound `n`. And of course, if typing the ">" is too taxing, the "---" operator is equivalent to the "-->" operator: int x = 3; while(x --- n) { cout << x << endl; } A few more goodies in this style at http://steike.com/code/useless/evil-c/ http://steike.com/code/useless/evil-c/ (home of the zip-quine.)

dustmop 11y ago

A crying face is called "ever" #define ever (;;) for ever { // do something }

mewse 11y ago

In Mac programming (pre-OSX) it was common for the OS to give you memory blocks not using a pointer, but using a 'handle', which under Mac OS<=9 meant "a pointer to a pointer" (where the direct pointer was under OS control so that it could move memory blocks around in low-memory situations. By comparison, a 'handle' in Windows is a "memory block the contents of which you don't know what they are". On Mac OS<=9, you did know the contents; you just had to double-dereference your pointer to reach them) This meant that when accessing data through these handles, you had to write code like this: (*handle)->field; or (**handle).field; Eventually, someone coined a pseudo-operator for reaching fields from a handle without requiring parentheses: handle[0]->field; [0]-> was named the "sproing" operator (on the theory that it indicates the desired value popping out of a box).

asveikau 11y ago
> By comparison, a 'handle' in Windows is a "memory block the contents of which you don't know what they are". This is incorrect. In Windows, the HANDLE is a typedef for a void pointer, but its usage is usually 100% analogous to a file descriptor - i.e. it is a token passed to kernel space, where the kernel looks it up in a per-process table of open files. I say "usually" because some components have re-used the HANDLE typedef for things which are not kernel objects - for example the HANDLE that comes from FindFirstFile() is actually a pointer to a structure in user-space [which AFAIK itself has a HANDLE to the directory].
- ms2 11y ago
  That's true for some handles in Win32, but (since we're talking about classic MacOS) Win16 handles were usually NEAR pointers inside kernel segments.
  - JoeAltmaier 11y ago
    True! That was a disaster; only 64K (16 bits) handles were possible across all processes. Many APIs had to be deprecated and redesigned when it went 32-bit. I've argued for using uuids for handles from here on out. They are endless; no effort to coordinate handle spaces is ever needed; they work locally and on the network; on some architectures they are even a register width scalar.
rcalhoun 11y ago
That should be "sprong" not "sproing". I restored Maf Vosburgh's page here: http://textmail.net/sprong/sprong.html http://textmail.net/sprong/sprong.html

caf 11y ago

"clown eyes"? That's the Bugs Bunny operator!

KeytarHero 11y ago

I don't know if it's named, but there's the !!?!!? operator [1] !ErrorHasOccured() ??!??! HandleError(); [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7825055/what-does-the-c-operator-do http://stackoverflow.com/questions/7825055/what-does-the-c-o...