True, but I wonder how much of a disadvantage is that in practice? Consider that kdb+, the language most optimized for huge data sizes, also has byte booleans.
I suspect that bit booleans were more important in the old days of limited RAM, and less important now. On 13 August 2015 at 20:22, greg heil <[email protected]> wrote: > Chris > > >Just going on the obvious seat of pants issue of (at least, assuming 8 = > byte size) 8x smaller arrays and 8x as much data that need sloshing around > through all the memory hierarchy. logically everything is well > representable ... it is just a problem at a practical level. > > greg > ~krsnadas.org > > -- > > from: chris burke <[email protected]> > to: Programming forum <[email protected]> > date: 13 August 2015 at 19:59 > subject: Re: [Jprogramming] Bitwise operations utility > > >> ...there has been a long standing resistance to having such. > > >I think the "resistance to having such" is more a matter of not having > the time to do it properly. > > >> ... is definitely the poorer for those who would use such. > > >In what way would you use bit booleans that would not be possible with > byte booleans? > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
