I think nouns type should not be touched at all but other types such as verb adverb can be grouped as a miscellaneous type with a new subtype since it is quite rare that those types will be used in user codes.
type promotion is another issue since current J implementation assumes max type. On Jul 30, 2016 3:06 AM, "Henry Rich" <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote: > It wouldn't be necessary to change VRESX to 29; we would put in bit-by-bit > tests as needed. I wanted to eliminate as much bit-testing as possible for > the usual cases. > > I don't think reordering the type bits is possible, since user code > depends on the assignment. > > Henry Rich > > On 7/29/2016 3:00 PM, Thomas Costigliola wrote: > >> Are the changes to the bit patterns at the top of va.h supposed to >> eliminate an extra lookup later? >> >> #define VBB B01 /* convert arguments to B >> */ >> #define VII INT /* convert arguments to I >> */ >> #define VDD FL /* convert arguments to D >> */ >> #define VZZ CMPX /* convert arguments to Z >> */ >> #define Vxx XNUM /* convert arguments to XNUM >> */ >> #define VQQ RAT /* convert arguments to RAT >> */ >> #define VARGMSK (VBB|VII|VDD|VZZ|Vxx|VQQ) // mask for argument >> requested type >> #define VRESX 8 // bit position for result flags >> >> But what happens if the extended floating point type (XD) gets >> implemented? That would push VRESX to 29 and leave no room for VXCVTTYPEX >> on 32 bit machines. I do have custom types beyond bit 29 and I would like >> to conform to the official source, what is the recommendation? Reorder the >> type bit patterns? >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
