At 08:30 ìì 22/6/2001 +0100, you wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Too late, deadline is...
Dilwyn - that might be an 'interesting' article actually, well, maybe not
COBOL, but how about something on the internals of Turbo (or QLib). I
rememeber
Too late, deadline is...
Dilwyn - that might be an 'interesting' article actually, well, maybe not
COBOL, but how about something on the internals of Turbo (or QLib). I
rememeber an article by Simon Goodwin (before he became Simon N Goodwin !)
in QL World which sort of delved into Turbo - but
I'd also be very interested in such an article.
Norman Dunbar wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
Too late, deadline is...
Dilwyn - that might be an 'interesting' article actually, well, maybe notCOBOL, but how about something on the internals of Turbo (or QLib). Irememeber an article by Simon
: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
I'd also be very interested in such an article.
-Original Message-
From: Malcolm Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
I'd also be very interested in such an article.
-Original Message-
From: Malcolm Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
I'd also be very interested in such an article.
-Original Message-
From: Malcolm Lear [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 9:18 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
I'd also be very interested in such an article.
Norman Dunbar wrote:
Anyone fancy writing a COBOL compiler for the QL :o)
MMmmm - that could be my next series of articles in QL Toady ! (Only
kidding Dilwyn, only kidding !)
Too late, deadline is...
--
Dilwyn Jones
So, Common Bi-monthly Orientated Language it is
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]
, Norman Dunbar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Too late, deadline is...
Dilwyn - that might be an 'interesting' article actually, well, maybe not
COBOL, but how about something on the internals of Turbo (or QLib). I
rememeber an article by Simon Goodwin (before he became
At 21:19 19/06/2001 +0100, you wrote:
Hmmm - the odd behaviour with negative numbers is not unique to SBASIC.
I've just tried it with QBASIC in NT and it does exactly the same.
I'd be interested to read the ISO or ANSI standard on this for the
justification. Curiously, the 68040 provides
To: ql-users
Cc: CMOUR
Subject: RE: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
Thank's a lot for all the answers. But this is quite annoying
: especially
because behavior is not the same for PRINT and INT. Better if
PRINT returns
something like 2.9 (in fact SMS loves exponential form I personaly
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 at 03:44:44, you wrote:
(ref: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
At 09:39 18/06/2001 +0200, you wrote:
As I see a question about FOR/NEXT loops, I have mine:
the subsequent peice of code gives me an unexpected result
FOR n = 2.95 to 3.05 STEP 0.01 : print n, INT(n)
Why ?
Cumulative
.
Claude
-Message d'origine-
De : Norman Dunbar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : jeudi 21 juin 2001 11:25
À : '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Objet : RE: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
-Original Message-
From: Tony Firshman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2001 10:18 AM
.
-Original Message-
From: mlaverne
Sent: 21 June 2001 07:08
To: ql-users
Cc: mlaverne
Subject: RE: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
At 15:36 18/06/2001 +0100, you wrote:
... But this is quite annoying :
Yes :-), but whenever you use irrational numbers (cannot be
represented
exactly
-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
Hello,
I would have liked to have 32-bit integer variables in SBASIC. The
Acorn Atom I believe had 32-bit integers (but no floats unless you
bought the add-on ROM).
Ian.
Norman Dunbar wrote:
Anyone fancy writing a COBOL compiler for the QL :o)
MMmmm - that could be my next series of articles in QL Toady ! (Only
kidding Dilwyn, only kidding !)
Too late, deadline is...
--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html
, it is easier to
accept the limitations and work around them.
Ian.
-Original Message-
From: cigmorfil
Sent: 19 June 2001 21:20
To: ql-users
Cc: cigmorfil
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
Hmmm - the odd behaviour with negative numbers is not
unique to SBASIC.
I've just
in C and Assembler using the
68040 FINT and FINTRZ instructions but didn't have time.
Ian.
-Original Message-
From: zeljko.nastasic
Sent: 18 June 2001 16:43
To: ql-users
Cc: zeljko.nastasic
Subject: RE: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
On 6/18/01 at 3:44 PM Claude Mourier 00 wrote
Only guessing because I can't try this until I get home, but when n
reaches the value 2. (the nearest it'll get to 3.00
because
0.01 is not represented exactly internally [that would need an
infinite
number of bits]), then PRINT n will round up to 3, whereas INT(n)
will
return the
:25
To: ql-users
Cc: pjwitte
Subject: Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
Only guessing because I can't try this until I get home, but when n
reaches the value 2. (the nearest it'll get to 3.00
because
0.01 is not represented exactly internally [that would need an
infinite
]]
Envoyé : mardi 19 juin 2001 17:25
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
SMSQ/E, and I think Qdos also, operates with (at least) four
different rounding schemes:
etc.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, June 19, 2001 10:05 AM
Subject: RE: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
Morning all,
I managed to do a bit of experimenting on the INT(x) problem last night.
Counting down gave the following results:
3.03 3
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001, you wrote:
Thank's a lot for your work. I think it would be a good idea to store the
result somewhere for all the community. Because I still think this behavior
is not obvious and can generate unexpected results and frustrations.
Claude
I couldn't resist a contribution
On Tue, 19 Jun 2001 at 20:57:03, you wrote:
(ref: 01061922523700.04336@laus)
lots of pertinent (and readable) comment, snipped
P.P.S. I guess it's really time I tried to sort out uploading the Minnie
sources?
That was a good PPS.
There are quite a few people waiting for this. I think one
Tony Firshman wrote:
I was falling asleep during the presentation ( very late to bed the
previous night) - maybe someone else can remember the relevance?
He needs the SMSQ pipes and job events. While the first could surly be
done under Minerva, the latter one IIRC can only be done through a
Laurence Reeves wrote:
Except... I have this vague memory that TT was going to make FOR loops
hold onto the initially supplied values, evaluate how many steps they
looked as if they needed to do, then do exactly that many, scaling the
variable to neat values along the way. Maybe he didn't.
Yes rather annoying. I've come across this problem several times. I
quite often
add a small value to n solve it. i.e. INT(n+0.1). I assume its got
something
to do with internal rounding.
Claude Mourier 00 wrote:
As I see a question about FOR/NEXT loops, I have mine:
the subsequent
On Mon, 18 Jun 2001 at 10:48:56, you wrote:
(ref: Hb5f10b5f2cd.0992857733.ln4p1327.ldn.swissbank.com@MHS)
Only guessing because I can't try this until I get home, but when n
reaches the value 2. (the nearest it'll get to 3.00 because
0.01 is not represented exactly internally [that
As I see a question about FOR/NEXT loops, I have mine:
the subsequent peice of code gives me an unexpected result
FOR n = 2.95 to 3.05 STEP 0.01 : print n, INT(n)
Why ?
Only guessing because I can't try this until I get home, but when n
reaches the value 2. (the nearest it'll get to
.
Claude
-Message d'origine-
De : ZN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : lundi 18 juin 2001 15:36
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : Re: [ql-users] NEXT in FOR-loop
As I see a question about FOR/NEXT loops, I have mine:
the subsequent peice of code gives me an unexpected result
FOR n = 2.95
100 CLS : INPUT '';n
110 FOR i=0 TO n
120IF i MOD 2=0 THEN NEXT i
130PRINT i
140 NEXT i
150PRINT 'done'
160 END FOR i
To get round this in a piece of code I'm currently engaged on, I have had
to test for i=n when the exception arises and use EXIT i when on the final
loop.
Christopher Cave wrote:
I have just come across a feature in the behaviour of NEXT in FOR-loops
which is a bit puzzling.
END FOR and NEXT are exactly the same commands, and what they do
is compare counter to limit. If below limit, increase counter and
loop again, if not just continue.
On Samedi 16 Juin 2001 17:51, Christopher Cave wrote:
I have just come across a feature in the behaviour of NEXT in FOR-loops
which is a bit puzzling. If NEXT is invoked from the body of the loop with
the counter NOT on its final value, control ends up in the loop with the
counter reset at
33 matches
Mail list logo
