We did talk about Math.imul, Dave presented it briefly IIRC last fall.
It's a bite-sized win. Should be able to get it into ES6.
/be
Rick Waldron wrote:
Filed https://bugs.ecmascript.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1452
On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Oliver Hunt <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I landed support for Math.imul in JSC yesterday as well.
Can't find actual documentation on the expected behavior so just
copied what mozilla does.
--Oliver
On Apr 26, 2013, at 10:58 AM, Rick Waldron <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On Apr 26, 2013 8:42 AM, "Tom Schuster" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
> Math.imul support was just added to the v8 trunk:
> https://code.google.com/p/v8/source/detail?r=14450.
> Is there any ongoing effort to standardize it?
>
As with Firefox, which you actually implemented :)
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=808148
There is no record of consensus (that I can locate) since this
thread first began. I don't see why anyone object, but we should
get it on record.
Rick
> On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 9:24 PM, Brendan Eich
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > David Herman wrote:
> >>
> >> On Nov 2, 2012, at 12:05 PM, Yehuda Katz<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Seems like a small surface-area with a large impact on
compilers.
> >>>
> >>> At first glance, looks good to me.
> >>>
> >>> Curiosity: Does this overlap with Brendan's work on value
objects (i.e.
> >>> will it become moot in the face of them)
> >>
> >>
> >> It could become unnecessary if you're working with value
objects. If you
> >> had ordinary numbers, you'd have to coerce them to u32 and
then multiply:
> >>
> >> var a = 0x7fffffff, b = 0x7fefefef; // both doubles
> >> var result = int32(a) * int32(b); // int32
> >>
> >> But value objects are still uncertain
> >
> >
> > I'm focusing on int64 and uint64 but making the framework as
general under
> > the hood as possible (e.g., the operators stuff, a
multimethod variation
> > that's inline-cacheable, based on an idea from Christian
Plesner Hansen).
> >
> > The need for 64-bit ints is pretty strong in Node.js and I
think this means
> > value objects are a priority for ES7.
> >
> >
> >> and at the very least much farther off into the future --
post-ES6.
> >> Engines could implement and ship Math.imul in very short order.
> >
> >
> > Agreed, and this kind of micro-evolution is important to
support even while
> > working on value objects for post-ES6. It may be we end up
with int32 and
> > uint32, but we don't need to if there's no strong use-case
not satisfied by
> > Math.imul.
> >
> > Note that there's no micro-evolutionary step involving
Math.imul64 that
> > satisfies the int64/uint64 use-cases Node faces (buffer and file
> > sizes/offsets). You need 64-bit addition, subtraction, and
probably other
> > operators -- and you need the data type, not just operations
that could be
> > Math methods.
> >
> > /be
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > es-discuss mailing list
> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> es-discuss mailing list
> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss
