Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Nick Ing-Simmons
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >Strings can be of three types--binary data, platform native, and UTF-32. >No, we are not messing around with UTF-8 or 16, nor are we messing with >EBCDIC, shift-JIS, or any of that stuff. I don't understand that in the light of supporting "platform n

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Nick Ing-Simmons
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >I'm reasonably certain that all platforms that perl will ultimately run on >can muster hardware support for 16-bit integers. Hmm, most modern RISCs are very bad at C-like 16-bit arithmetic - they have a tendency to widen to 32-bits. >I also expect th

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Nick Ing-Simmons
Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >BigInt and BigFloat are both pure perl, and as such their speed leaves a >*lot* to be desired. Fixing that (at least yanking some of it to XS) has >been on my ToDo list for a while, but other stuff keeps getting in the >way... :) My own "evolutionary

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 12:56 PM 12/29/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >Strings can be of three types--binary data, platform native, and UTF-32. > >No, we are not messing around with UTF-8 or 16, nor are we messing with > >EBCDIC, shift-JIS, or any of that stuff. > >I

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 01:05 PM 12/29/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >I'm reasonably certain that all platforms that perl will ultimately run on > >can muster hardware support for 16-bit integers. > >Hmm, most modern RISCs are very bad at C-like 16-bit arithmetic - t

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 01:15 PM 12/29/00 +, Nick Ing-Simmons wrote: >Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >BigInt and BigFloat are both pure perl, and as such their speed leaves a > >*lot* to be desired. Fixing that (at least yanking some of it to XS) has > >been on my ToDo list for a while, but other s

use some flag bits for payload?

2000-12-29 Thread David Mitchell
The current thread about bigints and overflows and stuff has given me a thought: A few of the bits in the flags word of an SV should be reserved as part of the payload (as opposed to being generic SV flags), so a particular SV type can make whatever internal use it likes of them. Ie the payload a

Re: use some flag bits for payload?

2000-12-29 Thread Dan Sugalski
At 04:31 PM 12/29/00 +, David Mitchell wrote: >The current thread about bigints and overflows and stuff has given me >a thought: > >A few of the bits in the flags word of an SV should be reserved as >part of the payload (as opposed to being generic SV flags), so a particular >SV type can make

Re: standard representations

2000-12-29 Thread Uri Guttman
> "DS" == Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: DS> Anyone know of a good bigint/bigfloat library whose terms are such DS> that we can just snag the source and use it in perl? I don't DS> really care to write the code for division, let alone the DS> transcendental math ops... well

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-29 Thread Piers Cawley
>"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> Piers Cawley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Yitzchak Scott-Thoennes) writes: >>> >>> > $srt =~ tr/0-9a-z\xe9/a-jA-ZE/; # uc & sort nums after letters >> >> `10' is going to sort before `2' with that rule. Having done the

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-29 Thread David L. Nicol
Piers Cawley wrote: > > >"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > After reading Cawley's > > method, I wondered if using it we could make radix-sorts the > > default sort method. > > Er... the point behind changing numbers to binary strings was > emphatically not so that they could be so

Re: [Fwd: Re: [FWP] sorting text in human-order]

2000-12-29 Thread Jarkko Hietaniemi
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 05:31:29AM +, David L. Nicol wrote: > Piers Cawley wrote: > > > > >"David L. Nicol" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > After reading Cawley's > > > method, I wondered if using it we could make radix-sorts the > > > default sort method. > > > > Er... the point behind ch