Re: seed

fir wrote:

i wonder if c should not have a seed kwyword ('type qualifier'? of
how to call this
>
i mean seed is such think you call reallock on ond only that
>
>
char* p = realloc(p, 200); //p is a seed
>
this is becouse you may write soem functions that expect seed
>
foo(char* p( //seed is expected and only seed
>
not normal pointer
>
so this is probably needed and will increase typesafety

i dont know how it is coz i dont remember that but probably those boolean should work after the  bitewise and arithmetic - as bitewise and arithmetioc have not much sense ob boolean
so it should probably be
1,2 arithmetic and bitwise
3 relational
4 bollean
as to first two probably bitwise should go first
hovever for me as i say & is both bitwise and boolean (more like boolean) so its fortunate it goes late - but ! going early is a mistake imo
its not what you sey "it is what it is and reason has nothink to do here"
simply some of this operators produce result to be consumed by others and reversing the order has not much sense - boolean should go late