From: Stephane Chazelas <Stephane_Chazelas@yahoo.fr>
To: Zsh hackers list <zsh-workers@sunsite.dk>,
Richard Hartmann <richih.mailinglist@gmail.com>,
Peter Stephenson <p.w.stephenson@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: arithmetic operator precedence
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2008 12:57:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080617115742.GE5016@sc.homeunix.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080617111934.GE10734@prunille.vinc17.org>
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 01:19:34PM +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> On 2008-06-17 10:45:09 +0100, Stephane Chazelas wrote:
> > But ** is not ^, it's a binary operator whose shape reminds that
> > of multiply, like a multiply++.
>
> So, why is ** right-associative while * is left-associative?
Don't know. I can't think of a good reason why 2**3**4 shoud be
2**(3**4) rather than (2**3)**4
Or
4 / 4\ 4
3 \3 / rather than / 3\
2 2 \2 /
> > And even then, POSIX's ^ in bc is handled as -3^2 = 9.
>
> But note that bc is the only calculator with such an unfortunate
> choice. And I doubt that bc has been designed by end users. Also,
> perhaps those who wrote bc in the first place didn't think about
> this problem and just wanted to privilege the precedence of
> unary operators as it is often the case.
Which makes sense to me. I was serious when I said that -3 ** 2
was more intuitive to me. Because -3 for me looks like a single
number constant.
BTW, I think I've got a rationale for -3 ** 2 == 9:
I think POSIX allows $((a * 3)) only as far as $a contains a
constant. If it contains "1 + 1", you won't be guaranteed to
have either 6 or 4.
SUSv3> If the shell variable x contains a value that forms a valid
SUSv3> integer constant, then the arithmetic expansions "$((x))" and
SUSv3> "$(($x))" shall return the same value.
So, if you agree that -3 is an integer constant, and agree that
as POSIX says variable expansion should be performed before the
arithmetic expression is evaluated, so that x=3; echo $(($x *
2)) is the same as echo $((-3 ** 2)), that'd mean tha
x=-3; $((x ** 2)) would either have to expand to -9, or $((-3 **
2)) should expand to 9.
> > It could be a good idea to ask ksh, POSIX/bc and perl authors for
> > the rationale behind their choices.
>
> I think that Perl authors would say something like conventional math
> writing (that's what some of authors of calculators say and what users
> often demand).
[...]
But I don't write 2**3 in conventional math writing, nor do I
write (1+2)/3.
I can understand there be different rules, because of the
linear, one character right to the previous one contraint of
computer strings while we have 2D freedom in hand writing.
1 + 2
-----
3
has to be translated to (1+2)/3 because of that constraint.
--
Stéphane
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-17 11:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-12 9:57 Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-12 13:12 ` Mikael Magnusson
2008-06-12 13:40 ` Peter Stephenson
2008-06-12 14:47 ` Bart Schaefer
2008-06-12 15:01 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-16 8:17 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-16 8:07 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-16 13:42 ` Peter Stephenson
2008-06-16 13:59 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-16 14:33 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 9:19 ` Richard Hartmann
2008-06-17 9:45 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 10:24 ` Richard Hartmann
2008-06-17 10:24 ` Richard Hartmann
2008-06-17 10:38 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 10:43 ` Peter Stephenson
2008-06-17 11:28 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 11:46 ` Peter Stephenson
2008-06-17 12:05 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-19 9:37 ` Jun T.
2008-06-19 9:54 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-19 16:00 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-19 16:20 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-19 17:14 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-19 9:58 ` Peter Stephenson
2008-06-19 12:29 ` Richard Hartmann
2008-06-19 16:04 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-19 16:10 ` Mikael Magnusson
2008-06-19 16:27 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-19 17:25 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-19 17:20 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 10:45 ` Richard Hartmann
2008-06-17 11:38 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 11:19 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 11:57 ` Stephane Chazelas [this message]
2008-06-17 12:35 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 12:46 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 13:02 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 13:20 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 14:33 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 14:53 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 15:49 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 14:35 ` Stephane Chazelas
2008-06-17 15:05 ` Vincent Lefevre
2008-06-17 10:54 ` Vincent Lefevre
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20080617115742.GE5016@sc.homeunix.net \
--to=stephane_chazelas@yahoo.fr \
--cc=p.w.stephenson@ntlworld.com \
--cc=richih.mailinglist@gmail.com \
--cc=zsh-workers@sunsite.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/zsh/
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).