Ok, thanks for explanations. What about this task?
2017-02-07 13:57 GMT+03:00 Igor Sapego <isap...@gridgain.com>: > But that's Ok. Since we use int8_t for bytes in C++ as well I guess > your -0x80 may have more sense than 0x80. > > Best Regards, > Igor > > On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 1:54 PM, Igor Sapego <isap...@gridgain.com> wrote: > >> I was just curious. >> >> In C++ both constants 0x80 and -0x80 are of type 'int' and have the same >> lower byte, so they give the same result. Though first number is actually >> 0x00000080 when the second one is 0xFFFFFF80. >> >> So it's just made a minus sign look a little redundant and pointless to me >> in C++ code. >> >> Best Regards, >> Igor >> >> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:15 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Byte.MIN_VALUE = -128 = -0x80 >>> Byte.MAX_VALUE = 127 = 0x7F >>> >>> It is just more evident for me. >>> >>> Maybe, I just have the Java programming style. >>> >>> In Java: >>> byte a = 100 | -0x80; // compiled >>> byte b = 100 | 0x80; // doesn't compile, explicit type casting is >>> neccessary (byte)(100 | 0x80) >>> System.out.println(a | -0x80); // -28 >>> System.out.println(a | 0x80); // 228 - cast to int >>> >>> Is it bad style? >>> >>> 2017-02-06 20:04 GMT+03:00 Igor Sapego <isap...@gridgain.com>: >>> >>>> Vyacheslav, >>>> >>>> Overall looks good. But why do you use -0x80 instead of 0x80? >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>> Igor >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 5:36 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Igor, >>>>> >>>>> I didn't change the CPP code before approval approach. >>>>> I shall write directly, sorry. >>>>> >>>>> But I made CPP changes already. >>>>> >>>>> > TestEscConvertFunctionFloat >>>>> > TestEscConvertFunctionDouble. >>>>> These tests were passed >>>>> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewQueued.html?itemId=445824> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2017-02-06 13:20 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: >>>>> >>>>>> .NET changes look good to me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Pavel >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 1:10 PM, Igor Sapego <isap...@gridgain.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> > Vyacheslav, I can see two ODBC tests fail in C++ test suits that >>>>>> should >>>>>> > not: >>>>>> > - TestEscConvertFunctionFloat >>>>>> > <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=444207&tab >>>>>> =buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_IgnitePlatformCppLi >>>>>> nux#testNameId-9178617718508801660> >>>>>> > - TestEscConvertFunctionDouble >>>>>> > <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=444207&tab >>>>>> =buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_IgnitePlatformCppLi >>>>>> nux#testNameId5432107083822590090> >>>>>> > . >>>>>> > >>>>>> > I believe, this is because I can't see any changes in C++ Decimal >>>>>> > marshaling code. >>>>>> > Please, pay attention to file ignite\modules\platforms\cpp\ >>>>>> > odbc\src\utility.cpp, >>>>>> > functions ReadDecimal and WriteDecimal. >>>>>> > >>>>>> > Best Regards, >>>>>> > Igor >>>>>> > >>>>>> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Vyacheslav Daradur < >>>>>> daradu...@gmail.com> >>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>> > >>>>>> >> Pavel, Igor >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> Please, review it again. >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/1473/files >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> All tests >>>>>> >> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=444231&tab >>>>>> =buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_RunAll> >>>>>> >> .NET tests >>>>>> >> <http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewLog.html?buildId=443439&tab >>>>>> =buildResultsDiv&buildTypeId=IgniteTests_IgnitePlatformNet> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> How about this solution? >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> 2017-02-03 13:59 GMT+03:00 Vyacheslav Daradur <daradu...@gmail.com >>>>>> >: >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >>> 1. On my first question >>>>>> >>> I think up, if we serialize only positive numbers, we can write >>>>>> sign in >>>>>> >>> first byte, because it is positive always. >>>>>> >>> I will try to make this decision >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> 2017-02-03 12:48 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org>: >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> Vyacheslav, >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> I see the problem now. Yes, negative scale is not supported in >>>>>> .NET. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> I don't think we should do the multiplication. As you described, >>>>>> this >>>>>> >>>> will >>>>>> >>>> break equality on Java side. SQL queries might be broken, etc. >>>>>> >>>> I think we should throw an exception in .NET when encountering >>>>>> negative >>>>>> >>>> decimal scale. >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Vladimir O, any thoughts? >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> Pavel >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> On Fri, Feb 3, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur < >>>>>> >>>> daradu...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> > Hello. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > I looked and understood the code of methods ReadDecimal and >>>>>> >>>> WriteDecimal >>>>>> >>>> > on .NET platform. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > 1. At the moment remaking of this methods for my >>>>>> Java-decimal-fix is >>>>>> >>>> very >>>>>> >>>> > difficult, it needs to write new methods for >>>>>> >>>> serialization/deserialization >>>>>> >>>> > of negative decimals. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > I can make it, but there is simpler decision: to add >>>>>> additional byte >>>>>> >>>> for >>>>>> >>>> > sign. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > I need advice: difficult solution (new methods .net) Versus : >>>>>> simple >>>>>> >>>> > solutions (additional byte)? >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > *I don't know yet, what changes are necessary on ะก++ platform. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > 2. I see a problem with the negative scale on .NET platform. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > Now negative scale is forbidden. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > We can make: >>>>>> >>>> > if (scale < 0) return Decimal.Multiply(new decimal(lo, mid, >>>>>> hi, neg, >>>>>> >>>> 0), >>>>>> >>>> > new decimal(Math.Pow(10, -scale))); >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > But there is the problem: >>>>>> >>>> > * 1 Serialize in Java; number=123456789, scale=-4 >>>>>> >>>> > * 2 Deserialize in .NET; number=1234567890000, scale=0 >>>>>> >>>> > * 3 Serialize in .NET; number=1234567890000, scale=0 >>>>>> >>>> > * 4 Deserialize in Java; number=1234567890000, scale=0 >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > Logically: (1) 123456789 * 10^4 == (2) 1234567890000 >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > In Java (1) not equal (2), because scales are different. >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > Any thougths? >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> > 2017-01-31 14:08 GMT+03:00 Pavel Tupitsyn < >>>>>> ptupit...@apache.org>: >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> >> Vyacheslav, >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >> I'm not sure I understand the code you attached. >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >> If you know how to fix the .NET part, can you just do it in >>>>>> your PR >>>>>> >>>> and >>>>>> >>>> >> run "Platform .NET" on TeamCity to verify? >>>>>> >>>> >> http://ci.ignite.apache.org/viewType.html?buildTypeId=Ignite >>>>>> >>>> >> Tests_IgnitePlatformNet >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >> Pavel >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur < >>>>>> >>>> daradu...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>> >> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> >>> Pavel, I see that you are the main contributor of Ignite.NET. >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> We should repair BinaryUtils#ReadDecimal and >>>>>> >>>> BinaryUtils#WriteDecimal. >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> *ReadDecimal: >>>>>> >>>> >>> byte[] mag = ReadByteArray(stream); // including at least >>>>>> one sign >>>>>> >>>> bit, >>>>>> >>>> >>> which is (ceil((this.bitLength() + 1)/8)) >>>>>> >>>> >>> bool neg = (mag[0] < 0); >>>>>> >>>> >>> if (scale < 0) >>>>>> >>>> >>> // TODO: a scale of -3 means the unscaled value is >>>>>> multiplied by >>>>>> >>>> 1000 >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> *WriteDecimal: >>>>>> >>>> >>> int sign = vals[3] < 0 ? -1 : 0; >>>>>> >>>> >>> stream.WriteInt(sign); >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> Can you help with this task? >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> 2017-01-31 12:46 GMT+03:00 Igor Sapego <isap...@gridgain.com >>>>>> >: >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> Vyacheslav, >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> I had a look at your PR and left some comments in Jira. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> Best Regards, >>>>>> >>>> >>>> Igor >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 12:52 PM, Vyacheslav Daradur < >>>>>> >>>> >>>> daradu...@gmail.com> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> > Hello. I fixed it. Please, review. >>>>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-3196 - >>>>>> Marshaling >>>>>> >>>> works >>>>>> >>>> >>>> wrong >>>>>> >>>> >>>> > for the BigDecimals that have negative scale >>>>>> >>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >>> >>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>> >>>> > >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> > >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
