Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!hc!lanl!jlg From: jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran Subject: Re: intrinsic functions, math operators (was: i++, i+=1, i=i+1) Message-ID: <3907@lanl.gov> Date: 21 Sep 88 02:05:17 GMT References: <1554@ficc.uu.net> Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory Lines: 21 From article <1554@ficc.uu.net>, by peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva): >> I may indeed want to write >> my own versions of some of the above functions (add pow() to the list). > > So #undef them. #undef _only_ works on macros. If pow() is not implemented as a macro, #undef will do _nothing_ to it. By the way, if you really believe that intrinsic functions should not be identified as such, you'd better hurry - the ANSI committee is about to define a whole raft of them. It is a good idea though, it helps make code portable (something that C is particularly bad at). > There's even a syntax for differentiation that is expressable in ASCII. And, when differentiation is added to a programming language, the syntax you mention is the one that should be used. J. Giles Los Alamos