Re: Another Suggestion (Was: My Bits are Flipping (or, "Why Can't I Be= Negative?")
- Posted by Travis Beaty <eucoder at travisbeaty.us> Aug 27, 2004
- 502 views
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. 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.