At 4:26 PM +0100 8/24/04, Nicholas Clark wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:49:37AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
As for rounding, I'm open to changes there too. Standard for
computing is round-to-zero, since it's easy (drop the fractional
part) but I was always taught round-to-closest-int. Too many
At 11:29 AM -0400 8/24/04, Matt Fowles wrote:
Dan~
I'm thinking now that multiplication of integers should upgrade to a
float (which is large enough to hold the result with no loss of
precision), division of integers should return a bignum (or a
bigrat), and all float operations should produce
Dan~
> I'm thinking now that multiplication of integers should upgrade to a
> float (which is large enough to hold the result with no loss of
> precision), division of integers should return a bignum (or a
> bigrat), and all float operations should produce floats. The
> destination PMC type can do
On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 10:49:37AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> As for rounding, I'm open to changes there too. Standard for
> computing is round-to-zero, since it's easy (drop the fractional
> part) but I was always taught round-to-closest-int. Too many physical
> sciences classes, I expect. E
At 11:05 AM +0200 8/24/04, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm up for some discussion on this one. I'm tempted to leave integer
binary ops integers,
I've already outlined that Python as well as Perl6 silently promote to
BigInt. I'd rather have Integer as the common
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm up for some discussion on this one. I'm tempted to leave integer
> binary ops integers,
I've already outlined that Python as well as Perl6 silently promote to
BigInt. I'd rather have Integer as the common base type that implements
most of these two la
On Mon, 2004-08-23 at 18:13, Dan Sugalski wrote:
> The unary behavior of the types is reasonably straightforward. What
> I'm puzzling over right now is the binary behavior. It's the edge
> cases that are troublesome, of course -- what to do on overflow, and
> what to do with fractional results.
Dan~
I was originally going to say do them all or do the integer
division/no overflow check option, but then something occurred to me.
We already have I registers. If someone wants speed they should be
using them anyway. If someone doesn't care about speed, but wants
those semantics, their comp
Leo's been nudging me to get the behaviours of the basic types
defined, so I'm working on updating PDD 17 with them.
The unary behavior of the types is reasonably straightforward. What
I'm puzzling over right now is the binary behavior. It's the edge
cases that are troublesome, of course -- wha
