RM = Raul Miller, DB = me, RH = Roger Hui DB> %floating_zero DB> _
RM> But % is not fixed. I only included % to demonstrate that I'd successfully created a negative zero. The point of my message was the line above this. RH> You can not win. Au contraire. It is you who are doomed. RH> You have to use primitives. You have to use memory. RH> If all the primitives take care to RH> eradicate minus zero, That was exactly the point; there are an infinite number of ways for me to manipulate memory to create a negative zero. I could even do it from outside of J. Our debate hinges on the definition of "have", used in the sentence: DB> J will still have a negative zero I define "have" to mean "the bit pattern for an IEEE floating point (FP) negative zero exists in an array of FP in J". You appear to define it as "any Z that can be distinguised from 0 using J primitives, such that y = y+Z where -. y e. 0,Z ". So our discussion is moot. RH> I estimate that it would take me less than an hour RH> to build a version of J that can eradicate RH> minus_zero, if I really wanted to. I estimate it would take me less than an hour to find a relevant bug in it, if I really wanted to. -Dan ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
