Re: Expressions versus the value they represent

David BL wrote:
...
> Below 'variable' is restricted to something that can be accessed by
> imperative statements, and not to be confused with a FOL variable.
>
> I don't say a variable points at a value. I say a variable *holds* a
> value. I restrict my usage of the word "pointer" to mean a *value*
> that represents an address or you could say an identifier for a
> variable. So a pointer points at a variable, not directly at a
> value.
>
> E.g. In C++
>
> int x = 10;
> int* p = &x;
>
> x is not a pointer. x is a variable that holds the value 10. p is a
> pointer variable that holds a pointer value. The pointer value points
> at the variable named x. There is no concept of a pointer value that
> points at the value 10. I don't understand what that could mean.
> Note that C++ outlaws the expression &10.
>

What has C++ got to do with any algebraic language? What does assignment have to do with any algebraic language?

(Regarding C++ I would say a more apt comparison with algebra symbols would be "const int x = 10;"). Received on Sat Apr 17 2010 - 02:14:02 CEST