Re: [ql-users] SOQL PPP tests
Hello Claude Here is a short guide to what has to be done to set-up soql PPP. Unzip the zipfile: - The zip file is designed to be unzipped on flp1_ If you unzip it to another location you will have to edit the files boot and bootPPP in the APS_MAIL_ directory. Each file requires a single change to the Dev$ initialisation. You may want to change the port definition in bootPPP. See the readme_txt file for more information. There are two files you HAVE to edit: In DNSrecords_txt you need to add any names that have to be resolved into their Internet addresses. The most important names are the names of your pop3 and smtp servers. To convert them into the hexadecimal values stored in DNSrecords you could use ping to resolve the addresses into decimal dot form. See example below. The decimal dot form can be converted to the required hexadecimal form by converting each decimal number to a two digit hexadecimal number and combining them to the 8 digit form. This again can be seen in the example below. The program pop3 requires the name MAIL to resolvable into your pop3 mail servers address. This requires the same number to be entered for MAIL as was entered for your pop3 server. The file mail_dat is used by soqlMailer to define various parameters: name = Put the name to appear in your email here host = Put the bit of your email address which comes after @ here user = Put the bit of your email address which comes before @ here smtp = Put the address of your smtp server here e.g. smtp.freesurf.ch tz = Put your time zone here e.g. +0100 You may also like to define sigf = with the name of a file to be used as your signature file. This will be appended to all mails sent. Now please read the readme_txt to see how to use the package __ example host name resolution using ping: --- C:\WINDOWSping smtp.freesurf.ch PING smtp.freesurf.ch [194.230.0.8]: 56 data bytes 64 bytes from 128.63.240.80: icmp_seq=0 time=16 ms 64 bytes from 128.63.240.80: icmp_seq=1 time=9 ms 64 bytes from 128.63.240.80: icmp_seq=2 time=9 ms 64 bytes from 128.63.240.80: icmp_seq=3 time=8 ms 64 bytes from 128.63.240.80: icmp_seq=4 time=8 ms ^C The address is converted as follows: 194 is C2 in hexadecimal 230 is E6 in hexadecimal 0 is 00 in hexadecimal 8 is 08 in hexadecimal The DNSrecords_txt entry is then: smtp.freesurf.ch 0xC2E60008 - Original Message - From: Claude Mourier 00 [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 10, 2003 10:35 AM Subject: RE: [ql-users] SOQL PPP tests Could you explain a bit what configuration is needed for this test, as I don't know TCP-IP ? Claude -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Envoye : dimanche 9 mars 2003 13:32 A : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : [ql-users] SOQL PPP tests Hi I'm looking for volunteers to try out soql PPP in various countries. You need to find an Internet-by-call provider of which there seem to be plenty but I can only test swiss ones from here. Once connected you can use your usual email accounts if you can enter their URLs with hexadecimal equivelent in the TCP_DNSrecords_txt file. You need to have a bit of time to play about with it as there is no smooth human interface or automatic installation. but if you can read this it must be working:-) Jon.
[ql-users] MasterBasic and DEA - new versions
I have updated MasterBasic and DEA so that they should be now GD2 compatible. I tested the new routines on MODE 32 only (QPC2 v3.03) so I would welcome if somebody could test other modes (ie. 16/256 colours modes). They are available as usual from my web site www.geocities.com/dsantachiara best regards Davide
Re: [ql-users] Sbasic and numbers
So finally we arrive at numbers in strings so why not use string arithmetic
as suggested by a number of correspondents ?
As it happens Jonathon Oakley has already written the basic (rather than
SBASIC) routines to carry out unlimited precision arirthmetic on strings
(nearly unlimited - there might be some problems going beyond 32766
significant digits).
This would eliminate the rounding errors that plague commercial software not
written in COBOL.
These routines are built into the simple calculator in QPAC1. I think Jochen
has the sources, but I do not think that these have been transferred to Wolf
yet.
No need for fancy modifications - the SBASIC arithmetic routines already
check the types of the variables involved in calculations and do different
operations for integers and floats. All you need to do is detect
string{+-*/}string and do string arithmetic with string result instead of
float. Lau Has a really dinky routine for doing square root in the same
number of operations as divide and other more complex functions can be left
for later.
A$ = 123456789.01 - 123456789
would give A$ = .01 - IEEE double precision will never give
you that result - it would be quicker, but wrong. Do you want it quick or
right?
The only parameterisation required is setting the maximum precision for
inexact operations (divide, square root, non positive integer powers and
trig)
Isn't it great being able to think up work for other people to do - I am
enjoying myself!
Tony Tebby
- Original Message -
From: Dave Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: samedi 15 mars 2003 00:06
Subject: Re: [ql-users] Sbasic and numbers
Re: [ql-users] Sbasic and numbers
TonyTebby writes:
No need for fancy modifications - the SBASIC arithmetic routines already
check the types of the variables involved in calculations and do different
operations for integers and floats. All you need to do is detect
string{+-*/}string and do string arithmetic with string result instead of
float. Lau Has a really dinky routine for doing square root in the same
number of operations as divide and other more complex functions can be
left
for later.
A$ = 123456789.01 - 123456789
would give A$ = .01 - IEEE double precision will never give
you that result - it would be quicker, but wrong. Do you want it quick or
right?
The only parameterisation required is setting the maximum precision for
inexact operations (divide, square root, non positive integer powers and
trig)
Good one! The same would presumably apply to any scheme devised to do the
maths, ie you could just as well use IEEE fp, eg
result$ = s.s - s.s
if you see what I mean. In fact you could probably cater for both string
arithmetic and IEEE by, for example, prefixing a marker to the IEEE
numbers.
The only disadvantage with this approach is that it would break a
fundamental compatibility with Qdos. Perhaps that doesnt matter?
Isn't it great being able to think up work for other people to do - I am
enjoying myself!
Welcome to the club!
Per
Re: [ql-users] Sbasic and numbers
PS. Out of interest, I thought I'd see how long my calculator takes to calculate pi. On my P1.7, it does it to 31567 digits in just under a minute (58.33s), and (leaving it running overnight) it took 10 hours, 10 minutes and 50 seconds to do it to its maximum precision of 315643 digits. I thought it took time proportionate to digits squared times log to base two of digits, but to be slightly more accurate, that should be log base 1.443-ish. Curiously, I've never attempted this before (on my old P100 it would have taken just over a week), and I have to admit I have a bug. Although I think it probably *did* do the calculation, (it took about as long as I expected), what I was left with was a NaN. I've just looked, and sure enough, it's because, when I compute pi (or Ln 10) for the internal cache, I bump up the precision temporarily, to ensure that the cached value is perfect. Guess who didn't check for precision already at max? The silly bit about the above is that it's only when it comes to display the value that it whines about the invalid 32768. The computation works fine. -- Lau http://www.bergbland.info Get a domain from http://oneandone.co.uk/xml/init?k_id=5165217 and I'll get the commission!
