💾 Archived View for republic.circumlunar.space › users › andybalaam › blogmirror › 2009-05-20_analog… captured on 2023-03-20 at 18:32:59. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-04)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I love this: C++ Multi-Dimensional Analog Literals.
I quote:
C++ Multi-Dimensional Analog Literals
Have you ever felt that integer literals like "4" don't convey the true
size of the value they denote? If so, use an analog integer literal
instead:
```
unsigned int b = I---------I;
```
It goes on to explain that you can use 2- and 3-dimensional "analog literals". Genius. Read the article. Try to read the code :)
Isn't C++ ... erm ... powerful?
You'll notice that there are 9 dashes used to denote 4. This is because the trick it is using uses operator--. I'm sure the original author did this in his/her sleep and thought it was too trivial to post (or posted it before?) but I thought: if we can use operator! instead, can't we create analog literals that use the same number of symbols as the number we want?
The answer is yes, and it's pretty simple:
notliterals.h:
class NotLiteral { public: NotLiteral( unsigned int ival ) : val_( ival ) { } NotLiteral operator!() const { return NotLiteral( val_ + 1 ); } operator unsigned int() const { return val_; } unsigned int val_; }; const NotLiteral NL( 0 );
test_notliterals.cpp:
#include "notliterals.h" #include <cassert> int main() { assert( !!!!NL == 4 ); assert( !!NL == 2 ); assert( !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!NL == 15 ); }
With this simpler form, it's almost believable that there might be some kind of useful application?
Extending this to 3 dimensions is left as an exercise for the reader. For 2 dimensions, if you just want the area (not the width and height), how about this?:
assert( !!! !!! !!!NL == 9 );
Update: By the way, if you don't like all the emphasis! of! using! exclamation! marks! you can do the same thing with the unary one's complement operator, ~. Just replace "!" everywhere above with "~" and you're done. Unfortunately, you can't do the same with - or + because the parser recognises "--" as the decrement operator instead of seeing that it is clearly two calls to the unary negation operator.
Originally posted at 2009-05-20 08:17:23+00:00. Automatically generated from the original post : apologies for the errors introduced.