Re: Kat's 8bit sequences
Jason Gade wrote:
>
>
> Not necessarily. More types are a bad thing, IMO, except for user-defined
> types.
>
> I like the generecity of the language as it is.
>
Kat-sequences wouldn't compromise generecity(is that a word?). They would
simply be a memory optimization perhaps with a flag in the sequence structure
telling us it is 8 bit or 16 bit. Whoever thinks that kat-sequences
would make the language less general misunderstands the idea.
The idea, nothing would change in either the API or the core language
definition.
Simply an implementation change. Two bits in the sequence structure could say,
okay everything stored as members are 8-bit or 16-bit integers and then the
interpreter would have to convert in combining sequences of different internal
types. Which generally would never happen, but the interpreter would have to
check for that.
Shawn Pringle B.Sc.
> >
> > My concern about adding string types is the potential that Euphoria will
> > then
> > have to do the type of garbage collection that is normally associated with
> > string usage. This can create unacceptable performance lags. If strings
> > can be implemented without the danger of such hiccups, I'd be much less
> > concerned about there addition.
>
> Euphoria already does garbage collection by reference counting. There's no
> reason
> this would change with the addition of strings.
>
> >
> > Is there a formal process for adding features? I ask because I'm not aware
> > of any.
>
> <a
> href="http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=182827&atid=902785">http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=182827&atid=902785</a>
>
> --
> 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.
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|
