On 09/04/08 00:43, Antony Scriven wrote: > On 08/04/2008, Bram Moolenaar<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I have been preparing a talk for the upcoming FISL > > conference in Brazil: > > http://fisl.softwarelivre.org/9.0/www/ > > > > One of the items I planned to discuss is why Vim has no > > floating point support. Well, this turned into actually > > implementing it. > > > > The main problem with floating point is that the usual > > notation already has a meaning: > > > > echo 123.456 > > 123456 > > > > [...] > > How many people actually do that? Should they be doing that? > IMHO I'd force people to use whitespace for concatenation in > this case (i.e. 123 . 456) and have 123.456 be a floating > point number. That's how Perl works, for example. --Antony
I always use spaces around the concatenation operator, but I've seen many people using it with no spaces, and as you know, in Vim upward compatibility is primordial. This said, a quick glance at the code shows that it seems to use only a doubleword for floats -- doesn't the C language support a native "float" type (or even "long float" or something?), which would map to the IEEE datatypes used by e.g. the ix87 math coprocessor? If the hardware supports 10^-308 to 10^308, I wouldn't expect ":echo &1.e-100" to return zero. Best regards, Tony. -- Sooner or later, generals will own you. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
