The GOTO
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-27 18:31
ENTERPRISE C doesn't need no foolish while() or for() constructs.
extern int printf(const char* format, ...);
void incr(int* inval, int insize)
{
(*inval) = (*inval) + insize;
}
void decr(int* inval, int insize)
{
(*inval) = (*inval) - insize;
}
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
if(argc >1) goto handlearguments;
goto missingarguments;
handlearguments: {
int i = 1;
printnextitem: {
if(i < argc)
{
printf("argv[%d] = %s\n", i, argv[i]);
incr(&i, 1);
goto printnextitem;
}
}
return 0;
}
missingarguments: {
printf("Usage: %s <arguments>\n", argv[0]);
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-27 18:35
Tanks fur your kewl trix :D Dis goin strait into mah codez.
Name:
????
2010-10-27 22:09
????
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-27 22:24
what's wrong with using i++?
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
if(argc >1) goto handlearguments;
goto missingarguments;
handlearguments: {
int i = 1;
printnextitem: {
if(i < argc)
{
printf("argv[%d] = %s\n", i, argv[i]);
i++;
goto printnextitem;
}
}
return 0;
}
missingarguments: {
printf("Usage: %s <arguments>\n", argv[0]);
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-27 23:06
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-27 23:44
what is enterprise exactly?
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 8:38
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 9:12
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 23:31
IMO, goto is gay. You should almost never NEED a jump. It makes the code hard to follow.
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 23:31
IMO, goto is gay. You should almost never NEED a jump. It makes the code hard to follow.
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 23:33
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-28 23:37
>>10-11
Why would you need a conditional or a loop?
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-29 4:19
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-29 15:34
>>11
FYI:
for(x;x<y;x++)
{
//nigger shit
}
if the same as
mydick:
//nigger shit
if(x<y){
x++;
goto mydick;
}
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-29 17:02
IMO, goto is gay. You should almost never NEED a jump. It makes the code hard to follow.
ITT: people who have never coded in assembly
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-29 18:35
>>16
I can't say that my experience in this regard has lessened my appreciation for structured programming any.
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 1:03
>>16
Implying that assembly does not have explicit loop constructs
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 1:17
>>18
implying that is the proper way of using implying.
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 5:24
>>15
No you idiot, it's the same as this:
x; goto crap;
mydick:
goto shit;
ass: x++;
if(x<y) goto mydick;
goto fuck;
shit:
//nigger shit
goto ass;
fuck: //after loop
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 7:08
>>18
implying x86 is the only assembly
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 9:32
>>1
incr(&a, -1);
decr(&b, -1);
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 11:06
>>21
Implying I wasn't aware of that
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 11:45
>>20
congrats you have a compiler error with your shitty code.
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 14:15
>>22
void incr(int* inval, unsigned int insize)
void decr(int* inval, unsigned int insize)
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 16:52
>>25
incr(&a, UINT_MAX);
decr(&b, UINT_MAX);
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 17:17
>>26
Well now you're just being stupid, aren't you? Did you know that
UINT_MAX is out of range of a (signed)
int by a factor of two?
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 17:40
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-30 23:17
Name:
Anonymous
2010-10-31 4:41
Name:
Anonymous
2010-11-01 10:52
>>30
<spoiler>fucking spoiler, how do they work?</spoiler>
Name:
Anonymous
2010-11-01 11:09
>>31
/i don't know, tell me/