On Sunday, 26 June 2016 at 02:05:53 UTC, "Smoke" Adams wrote:
On Sunday, 26 June 2016 at 00:31:29 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 23:01:00 UTC, "Smoke" Adams wrote:
This proves nothing.
This isn't a proof, this is a definition. This is the
definition that is used by all programming languages out there
and all CPUs. It isn't going to change because someone on the
internet think he has a better definition that provide no
clear advantage over the current one.
Again, no proof at all
Either can't read or you can't think. Which is it ?
and inaccurate. Not every programming language or cpu does
this. Please don't make up facts to support your "definitions"
and desires. Having a negative modulo is just ignorant.
Languages:
C#: https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/0w4e0fzs.aspx
Java:
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jls/se7/html/jls-15.html#jls-15.17.3
C11:
http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/C99RationaleV5.10.pdf (See 6.5.5 for update on % operator, mentioning, example at 7.20.6).
Python2: https://docs.python.org/2/reference/expressions.html
Python3: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/expressions.html
CPUs:
Arm7(eeabi):
https://github.com/wayling/xboot-clone/blob/master/src/arch/arm/lib/gcc/__aeabi_idivmod.S
Arm7(Darwin):
http://opensource.apple.com//source/clang/clang-163.7.1/src/projects/compiler-rt/lib/arm/modsi3.S
Mips:
http://www.mrc.uidaho.edu/mrc/people/jff/digital/MIPSir.html (See
DIV instruction)
X86: http://x86.renejeschke.de/html/file_module_x86_id_137.html
Now I'm sure there are a weird CPU that isn't produced since the
80s and that D will never support that do it in some other way,
but for all platforms that matter today, this isn't the case.
This is not MY definition, this is the definition everybody
except you uses? Even PHP get this right
(http://php.net/manual/en/language.operators.arithmetic.php).
Now champion, what do you have supporting your definition ?