1. eternity
Please, free the lost bit for eternity in integers! It is so inconvenient.
2. Re: eternity
egg wrote:
>
> Please, free the lost bit for eternity in integers! It is so inconvenient.
I had to read this several times to convince myself that it wasn't spam.
I wonder if it sounds so poetic in Russian.
In any case, we're not going to get 32-bit integers any time soon, since
it would require completely rewriting the back end. I suppose that when
euphoria goes 64-bit, we can have 62 bit integers, but I wouldn't hold
my breath for that.
Matt
3. Re: eternity
- Posted by Alex Caracatsanis <sunpsych at ?cabl?.com.au>
Jan 25, 2008
-
Last edited Jan 26, 2008
egg wrote:
>
> Please, free the lost bit for eternity in integers! It is so inconvenient.
Just for my education and interest, what is "the lost bit", and why is it
"inconvenient"?
A genuine question; a very basic answer will be fine.
Thanks
Alex Caracatsanis
4. Re: eternity
Alex Caracatsanis wrote:
>
> egg wrote:
> >
> > Please, free the lost bit for eternity in integers! It is so inconvenient.
>
> Just for my education and interest, what is "the lost bit", and why is it
> "inconvenient"?
>
> A genuine question; a very basic answer will be fine.
>
> Thanks
>
> Alex Caracatsanis
Euphoria uses 31-bit integers instead of 32-bit, which effectively cuts the
integer range in half. But it's still approximately +/- 1 billion or so.
The most significant bit is used as a flag to tell whether the value is an
integer or a pointer to either an atom or a sequence.
A lot of interpreted languages have forgone the use of integers altogether and
represent all numbers as either strings or as doubles. So I don't really see this
as a limitation myself.
--
A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple
system that works.
--John Gall's 15th law of Systemantics.
"Premature optimization is the root of all evil in programming."
--C.A.R. Hoare
j.
