HaloO,
Darren Duncan wrote:
Michael G Schwern wrote:
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
I want to stress this last point. We have the three types Int,
Rat and Num. What exactly is the purpose of Num? The IEEE formats
will be handled by num64 and the like. Is it just there for
holding properties? Or
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 at wee small hour of 02:20:22 EDT
you, Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED], wrote:
Darren Duncan wrote:
[2] Num should have an optional limit on the number of
decimal places it remembers, like NUMERIC in SQL, but
that's a simple truncation.
I disagree.
Any
So, the concrete use-case I'm thinking of here is currency.
Darren Duncan wrote:
[2] Num should have an optional limit on the number of decimal places
it remembers, like NUMERIC in SQL, but that's a simple truncation.
I disagree.
For starters, any limit built into a type definition
Darren Duncan wrote:
4.5207196*10**30 - 45207196*10**37
Before anyone nitpicks, I meant to say on that line:
4.5207196*10**44 - 45207196*10**37
-- Darren Duncan
Darren Duncan wrote:
Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
Correct. I suspect that eventually the Rakudo developers will have
to develop a custom set of PMCs for Perl 6 behaviors rather than
relying on the Parrot ones.
I think it would be better for things like unlimited-precision integers
and
HaloO,
On Sunday, 5. October 2008 04:23:42 Darren Duncan wrote:
Note that just as integers are naturally radix independent, the unlimited
rationals should be too, and the latter can compactly represent all
rationals as a triple of integers corresponding roughly to a (normalized)
[mantissa,
On Sunday, 5. October 2008 04:23:42 Darren Duncan wrote:
Note that just as integers are naturally radix independent, the unlimited
rationals should be too, and the latter can compactly represent all
rationals as a triple of integers corresponding roughly to a (normalized)
[mantissa, radix,
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
I want to stress this last point. We have the three types Int, Rat and Num.
What exactly is the purpose of Num? The IEEE formats will be handled
by num64 and the like. Is it just there for holding properties? Or does
it do some more advanced numeric stuff?
Int, Rat
On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 09:37:29PM -0700, Mark Biggar wrote:
trivial and vice versa. But promotion (or demotion) between IEEE floats
and rationals is really hard and I don't know of a language that even
tries. The major problem is that the demotion from rational to IEEE
float is very
In-Reply-To: Message from Nicholas Clark [EMAIL PROTECTED]
of Sun, 05 Oct 2008 22:13:14 BST. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Studiously ignoring that request to nail down promotion and demotion, I'm
going to jump straight to implementation, and ask:
If one has floating point in the mix [and however
Michael G Schwern wrote:
TSa (Thomas Sandlaß) wrote:
I want to stress this last point. We have the three types Int, Rat and Num.
What exactly is the purpose of Num? The IEEE formats will be handled
by num64 and the like. Is it just there for holding properties? Or does
it do some more advanced
Nicholas Clark wrote:
If one has floating point in the mix [and however much one uses rationals,
and has the parser store all decimal string constants as rationals, floating
point enters the mix as soon as someone wants to use transcendental functions
such as sin(), exp() or sqrt()], I can't see
Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 11:57:30PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What's the status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6? Is see the docs say Perl
6
: intrinsically supports big integers and rationals through its system of type
: declarations. Int automatically supports
In-Reply-To: Message from Michael G Schwern [EMAIL PROTECTED]
of Sat, 04 Oct 2008 02:06:18 EDT. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Larry Wall wrote:
The status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6 is fine. It's rakudo that
doesn't do so well. :)
As another datapoint:
$ pugs -e 'say 2**40'
1099511627776
$
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 09:47:38PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 11:57:30PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What's the status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6? Is see the
: docs say Perl 6 intrinsically supports big integers and rationals
: through its system of type
From: Patrick R. Michaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 09:41:22 -0500
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 09:47:38PM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 11:57:30PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What's the status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6? Is see the
:
From: Bob Rogers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 22:08:10 -0400
From: Patrick R. Michaud [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 4 Oct 2008 18:15:57 -0500
. . .
All of the mechanisms I've been able to find in Parrot for
converting an arbitrary PMC to a number
What's the status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6? Is see the docs say Perl 6
intrinsically supports big integers and rationals through its system of type
declarations. Int automatically supports promotion to arbitrary precision but
it looks like it's doing the same thing as Perl 5.
$ ./perl6 -e
On Fri, Oct 03, 2008 at 11:57:30PM -0400, Michael G Schwern wrote:
: What's the status of numeric upgrades in Perl 6? Is see the docs say Perl 6
: intrinsically supports big integers and rationals through its system of type
: declarations. Int automatically supports promotion to arbitrary
19 matches
Mail list logo
