Search Results
6/19/2025, 9:26:14 AM
>>105638499
>Unless you mean from the perspective of a parser
Yes, always. I can't conceive of another way to think about those things.
>that can't be the case because *N is always expanded to 0*N, which is different from N (sans asterisk) that expands to N*N.
JUST
I would be dumbfounded if that was the case, that's how a non-technical person would think about this, and this is absolutely not the way to think about operators.
>Unless you mean from the perspective of a parser
Yes, always. I can't conceive of another way to think about those things.
>that can't be the case because *N is always expanded to 0*N, which is different from N (sans asterisk) that expands to N*N.
JUST
I would be dumbfounded if that was the case, that's how a non-technical person would think about this, and this is absolutely not the way to think about operators.
Page 1