Re: Another Suggestion (Was: My Bits are Flipping (or, "Why Can't I Be= Negative?")

new topic     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Hello WingZero.

Yes, that would be very nice.  I had expected Euphoria to recognize the fact 
that the negative bit was flagged, and the number was therefore negative; 
however, in retrospect, I can see why it doesn't.  There needs to be some 
specific way to allow Euphoria to get negative values from a C shared library 
-- otherwise, there are going to be so many hacks and workarounds it'll 
boggle the mind (not to mention bloat the code).

This is almost a necessity to do what I'm trying to do.

sad  Crap.


Travis.

On Friday 27 August 2004 02:38 pm, Elliott Sales de Andrade wrote:
>     Unfotunately, parameters are only interpreted one way. Wouldn't it be=
> =20
> nice if you could do something like this:=20
> call_back({routine_id("MouseCallback"), {C_INT, C_DOUBLE, C_DOUBLE},=20
> C_DOUBLE})  --{mouse button, x-position, y-position} return: I don't know,=
> =20
> but something that needed to be a double. We wouldn't need to use any
> weird= =20
> workarounds for signed numbers, or strange stuff for doubles/floats.=20
> Obviously, this would be quite complicated to implement. As it stands, the=
> =20
> interpreter just needs to copy a set of routines depending on how many=20
> parameters there are for the callback. It would probably need some nice=20
> assembler or C trickery to get this advanced method to work. With this=20
> somewhat more complex method, though, we could create call-back
> procedures,= =20
> too (something that's moderately annoying.)


-- 
It's no use crying over spilt milk -- it only makes it salty for the cat.

new topic     » topic index » view thread      » older message » newer message

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu