On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 at 12:38:38, you wrote:
(ref: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
I only had the jokes and the exe file. There was no report on mine.
Mind you, this virus (is a worm) and burrows into your system then hijacks
Outlook to send itself areound to everyone in your address book - so it
could have
At 21:19 19/06/2001 +0100, you wrote:
Hmmm - the odd behaviour with negative numbers is not unique to SBASIC.
I've just tried it with QBASIC in NT and it does exactly the same.
I'd be interested to read the ISO or ANSI standard on this for the
justification. Curiously, the 68040 provides
At 15:36 18/06/2001 +0100, you wrote:
... But this is quite annoying :
Yes :-), but whenever you use irrational numbers (cannot be represented
exactly in a limited precision number system) ...
Correction: an irrational number is defined to be any number not
representable as the ratio of two
On Wed, 20 Jun 2001 at 03:44:44, you wrote:
(ref: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
At 09:39 18/06/2001 +0200, you wrote:
As I see a question about FOR/NEXT loops, I have mine:
the subsequent peice of code gives me an unexpected result
FOR n = 2.95 to 3.05 STEP 0.01 : print n, INT(n)
Why ?
Cumulative
Such an approach is the only way to get acurate computing with QDOS/SMS up
to 9 digits : for most purpose (I mean : when you expect that 1 and 1 is 2,
not 1.999/2.1 or something else) floating point number is nonsense.
PROCs and FNs like IDEC$() and LPUT/LGET are very useful in this respect.
Hello,
...an irrational number is defined to be any number not
representable as the ratio of two integers.
I know that definition, but isn't an infinite number of decimal (or
binary) places what you end up with as a result?
I accept that 1/3 is not irrational - I am guilty of using the term
As long as you don't use decimal places you can consider that reals in
SBasic are long integers (even if they always have a two bytes mantissa)
-Message d'origine-
De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Envoyé : jeudi 21 juin 2001 11:42
À : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Objet : RE:
Bill,
welcome back :o)
Regards, Norman.
PS. Your business contact may not have sent you the virus, but his PC did,
he may not be aware of this fact - unless he checks in his 'sent items'
folder.
Norman Dunbar
Norman Dunbar wrote:
Anyone fancy writing a COBOL compiler for the QL :o)
MMmmm - that could be my next series of articles in QL Toady ! (Only
kidding Dilwyn, only kidding !)
Too late, deadline is...
--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html
Hi Giorgio Garabello,
Q40 is still available?
Should be, but production runs very slow.
Q60 is in production?
Still not in series production yet, but I try to supply a few waiting users
with single boards. If you want one, please contact me by private email.
There still is hope for a Q60
We seem to have managed to print the wrong telephone number in QL
Today for Derek Stewart's Holborn View BBS.
The correct telephone number is (+44) 01773-741335
Apologies to all.
--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html
11 matches
Mail list logo
