--------------------------------------------
On Sun, 10/27/13, Domenic Denicola <[email protected]> wrote:

 Subject: RE: Proposal for new floating point and integer data types
 To: "Rick Waldron" <[email protected]>, "Brandon Andrews" 
<[email protected]>
 Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
 Date: Sunday, October 27, 2013, 12:18 AM
 
 Also
 http://www.slideshare.net/BrendanEich/js-resp/5,
 presented in convenient video form at
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXIkTrq3Rgg.
 

(I'm not sure how to replay to these. I see people bottom posting usually. Not 
overly familiar with mailing lists, so I hope this works).

Woah, I didn't see that video when I was searching. (Finding a bunch searching 
for ECMAscript 7 and 8 and simd now). That's exactly the direction I was hoping 
JS would go. I was actually typing up SIMD types, but removed it as it seemed 
too much to request. If they're willing to add all the types and the operators 
with swizzling support that would probably make JS nearly perfect for 
computing. (I have a few projects I did in the past which could have used it). 
I found a gist where someone wrote of a proposal apparently 
https://gist.github.com/jensnockert/7a0f6a99a0f3bde2facb , looks very well 
thought out, even including prefetch operations which would be amazing.

Looking at his direction and slides, then single and double in my proposal 
would be float32, float64 which is more aesthetically similar to the other 
types. I'm impressed at how well thought out everything is for the future of JS.

I see the slide with the types he's suggesting. Are there types for the 
int8/16/32, and uint8/16/32?

var foo = 0: float32;

On slide 14 he has float32(0) indicating something like the following (or using 
the literal syntax):

var foo = float32(42);

I was worried about suggesting something like that for compatibility with old 
code, but if that's the direction and has no issues, then it's perfect. I just 
realized that Brendan Eich created JS so I assume he fully knows about any 
compatability issues. His solution is cleaner for conversions.

With what he's proposing how do you perform a bitwise conversion from uint64 to 
a float64? I think the norm right now is to use the typed array spec with views 
for 32-bit conversions. (It comes up in a few problems). I assume they're 
adding Uint64Array and Int64Array with his proposed changes which would provide 
a solution for the bitwise conversion.

I think strong typing would be a really good idea with all of these types 
flying around. Found a few posts Brendan Eich made about strong typing. Can't 
figure out how he feels about that. Would static typing ever work for JS? Kind 
of like a "use static"; with proper all or nothing compilation?
_______________________________________________
es-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/es-discuss

Reply via email to