On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 07:39:43PM +, Graham Barr wrote:
: On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:59:07AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > I'm thinking at the moment that I'd like to go back to the Ada notation
: > and use # for the radix, and rather that using dots, use colons. So
: > an IP address would act
On Mon, 2002-11-18 at 10:08, Erik Steven Harrison wrote:
>
> --
>
> On 17 Nov 2002 11:09:53 -050
> Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
> >On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 13:26, Angel Faus wrote:
> >>
> >> There are many ways to specify literal numeric values in perl, but
> >> they default to base 10 for input an
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 10:59:07AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:40:38PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> : I would preferer to limit the usage of "letter notation" to just base
> : 11-36, and have n:F = n:f for every n.
> :
> : It is simpler, and we can always use de "dot notat
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:40:38PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
: I would preferer to limit the usage of "letter notation" to just base
: 11-36, and have n:F = n:f for every n.
:
: It is simpler, and we can always use de "dot notation" for bigger
: bases.
I'm thinking at the moment that I'd like t
--
On 17 Nov 2002 11:09:53 -050
Bryan C. Warnock wrote:
>On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 13:26, Angel Faus wrote:
>>
>> There are many ways to specify literal numeric values in perl, but
>> they default to base 10 for input and output. Once the number has
>
>Surely, Perl 6 will allow changing the ra
On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 13:26, Angel Faus wrote:
>
> There are many ways to specify literal numeric values in perl, but
> they default to base 10 for input and output. Once the number has
Surely, Perl 6 will allow changing the radix on a more global scale.
use radix(16); # or something of the il
On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 14:08, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> > For example:
> >
> > my $x = 18;
> > my $y = -18;
>
> my $z = -256:234.254; # negative number
> my $e = 256:-234.254; # error
Why?
--
Brya
On Wed, 2002-11-13 at 14:53, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> >> So, can we specify floats in other bases?
> >
> > Why would you want to?
>
> Personally I wouldn't. That doesn't mean it's not useful to someone.
FWIW, I occasionally work with floating point in base-2 and base-16.
Not that that should, b
On Fri, Nov 15, 2002 at 12:03:32PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:24:50AM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
>
> : Also, on this subject...what happens if I want to use "letter notation"
> : in a base higher than 36?
>
> What happens then is that people will think you're silly. :-
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 12:24:50AM -0800, Dave Storrs wrote:
: On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: > : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
: >
: > Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
: >
: > Larry
:
: Does this mean that you
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:40:38PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
I would preferer to limit the usage of "letter notation" to just base
11-36, and have n:F = n:f for every n.
OK, sounds good: being consistent wins. Only bases up to 36 may be
expressed with letters.
MikeL
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:40:38PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> Michael Lazzaro escribió:
> > We should talk about this. My original proposal was to do this:
> >
> > (Case 1) base 2-10: use 0..9
> >
> > (Case 2) base 11-36: use (0..9, a..z), but allow A..Z such that
> >
> > 0x00ff == 0x00FF
> >
On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 11:07 AM, Angel Faus wrote:
Larry
Mmm.. I thought that the whole purpose of creating a new mailing list
was to prevent you from reading it.
(Dunno, I suspect that once we get our initial act together (i.e. posts
drop from 70 a day to more like 20), this li
Larry Wall escribió:
> : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
>
> Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in
> hex).
>
> Larry
Mmm.. I thought that the whole purpose of creating a new mailing list
was to prevent you from reading it.
Not that I am against your pre
On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 11:02:02AM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> Now, it would be nice to have a subroutine that, given a number, could
> output in any arbitrary base. Perhaps Perl6 could have a radix()
> subroutine that returns a string representation thusly:
>
> $base = 2;
> $n
Michael Lazzaro escribió:
> We should talk about this. My original proposal was to do this:
>
> (Case 1) base 2-10: use 0..9
>
> (Case 2) base 11-36: use (0..9, a..z), but allow A..Z such that
>
> 0x00ff == 0x00FF
>
> which seems necessary, IMHO.
>
> (Case 3) base 37-62: use (0..9,a..z,
On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 12:24 AM, Dave Storrs wrote:
Does this mean that you can't use _ in numbers if the radix is higher
than 16? (For example, in base 20, the letters A-J should be
considered to be digits...can you put underscores between them?)
No, that should be fine... just
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 04:34:12PM -0500, Joseph F. Ryan wrote:
> Well, why would you want a float in any radix? To represent a
> fractional part of a whole digit in that radix, of course.
Right, but when would you, while writing code, think something like, "I
need a base 16 representation of the
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
>
> Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
>
> Larry
Does this mean that you can't use _ in numbers if the radix is higher than 16? (For
example, in ba
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 03:00:07PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> > : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
> >
> > Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
>
> Ah, good. It has always mildly
Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:38:08PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
For example, the integer 30 can be written in hexadecimal base in two
equivalent ways:
my $x = 16:1D
my $x = 16:1.14
These two represe
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 12:33:09PM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
> : 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
>
> Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
Ah, good. It has always mildly annoyed me in prior perls that 1__2
was a literal 12.
-Scott
--
Jonathan Scot
: 1_2_3_4__5___6 (absurd, but doable)
Nope, _ is allowed only between digits (counting a-f as digits in hex).
Larry
> except for obfuscatory purposes. Besides, if we allow dots for
> floating point numbers how do we represent this integer:
>
> 256:234.254
Using this notation is cute: a generalization that lets us specify a strange
thing. That are the reasons for using such a thing?
1) an alternative to C
2)
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:53:05PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 01:10:05PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:38:08PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> >> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> >>> For example, the integer 30
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 01:10:05PM -0600, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:38:08PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
>>> For example, the integer 30 can be written in hexadecimal base in two
>>> equivalent ways:
>>>
>
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 06:38:08PM +, Andrew Wilson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> > For example, the integer 30 can be written in hexadecimal base in two
> > equivalent ways:
> >
> > my $x = 16:1D
> > my $x = 16:1.14
> >
> > These two representati
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> For example:
>
> my $x = 18;
> my $y = -18;
my $z = -256:234.254; # negative number
my $e = 256:-234.254; # error
> Perl allows the underline character, C<_>, to be placed as a separator
> betwee
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 07:26:06PM +0100, Angel Faus wrote:
> For example, the integer 30 can be written in hexadecimal base in two
> equivalent ways:
>
> my $x = 16:1D
> my $x = 16:1.14
>
> These two representations are incompatible, so writing something like
> C<16:D.13> will generate a c
29 matches
Mail list logo
