Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register
Groups > comp.lang.misc > #11501
| From | Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.misc |
| Subject | Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? |
| Date | 2025-11-03 22:31 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <10eb70g$36c03$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <10eag7n$2tsjd$1@dont-email.me> <10eaid1$2vo54$1@dont-email.me> <10eap00$30gve$2@dont-email.me> <10eavpi$342gf$1@dont-email.me> <10eb274$34udf$1@dont-email.me> |
On 03.11.2025 21:10, bart wrote:
> On 03/11/2025 19:28, Janis Papanagnou wrote:
>> On 03.11.2025 18:32, bart wrote:
>
>
>>> The '283' represents some unknown number of initialiser values.
>>
>> Nonsense; if you have an initializer the number isn't unknown.
>
> It will be known to the compiler after parsing; it might not be known to
> you!
But it is known; you see the numbers below! - You can count them, you
can use a simple "processor" to count them, or (as suggested) you can
in Algol 68 use a data structure that is "flexible" (for example).
>
> By coincidence, here is some init data I had to generate today:
>
> 0x55, 0x48, 0x8B, 0xEC, 0x48, 0x83, 0xEC, 0x20, 0x48, 0x89, 0x4D, 0x10,
> 0x48, 0x89, 0x55, 0x18, 0x4C, 0x89, 0x45, 0x20, 0x4C, 0x89, 0x4D, 0x28,
> 0x33, 0xC0, 0x48, 0x89, 0x45, 0xF0, 0x8B, 0x45, 0x20, 0x83, 0xE0, 0x01,
> 0x48, 0x85, 0xC0, 0x74, 0x0B, 0xB8, 0x08, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x48, 0x89,
> 0x45, 0xF0, 0x6A, 0x00, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45, 0x20, 0x48, 0xC1, 0xE0, 0x03,
> 0x48, 0x01, 0x45, 0xF0, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45, 0x20, 0x48, 0x89, 0x45, 0xE8,
> 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45, 0xE8, 0x48, 0x83, 0xF8, 0x01, 0x0F, 0x8C, 0x25, 0x00,
> 0x00, 0x00, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45, 0x18, 0x4C, 0x8B, 0x55, 0xE8, 0x4A, 0x8B,
> 0x44, 0xD0, 0xF8, 0x48, 0x89, 0x45, 0xF8, 0xFF, 0x75, 0xF8, 0x48, 0x8B,
> 0x45, 0xE8, 0x48, 0xFF, 0xC8, 0x48, 0x89, 0x45, 0xE8, 0x48, 0x83, 0xF8,
> 0x01, 0x7D, 0xDB, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x0C, 0x24, 0xF3, 0x0F, 0x7E, 0x04, 0x24,
> 0x48, 0x8B, 0x54, 0x24, 0x08, 0xF3, 0x0F, 0x7E, 0x4C, 0x24, 0x08, 0x4C,
> 0x8B, 0x44, 0x24, 0x10, 0xF3, 0x0F, 0x7E, 0x54, 0x24, 0x10, 0x4C, 0x8B,
> 0x4C, 0x24, 0x18, 0xF3, 0x0F, 0x7E, 0x5C, 0x24, 0x18, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45,
> 0x10, 0x48, 0xFF, 0xD0, 0x48, 0x03, 0x65, 0xF0, 0x44, 0x8A, 0x55, 0x28,
> 0x45, 0x22, 0xD2, 0x74, 0x05, 0x66, 0x48, 0x0F, 0x7E, 0xC0, 0x48, 0x89,
> 0x45, 0xF8, 0x48, 0x8B, 0x45, 0xF8, 0x48, 0x83, 0xC4, 0x20, 0x5D, 0xC3
>
> (I hope, that when posted, it doesn't wrap.)
(It's fine.)
>
> This is meant to be incorporated into some program source code. To avoid
> annoying you, let's pretend that's C, then I'd need to book-end it like
> this:
>
> char data[] = {
> <block of text from above>
> };
>
> Now, you're saying I ought to know what goes inside '[]'.
Well, yes. It's obviously 12 columns and 17 rows, as can quickly be
seen. - Of course I would expect that you know what sort of data the
program will generate, but if not, 12*17 = 170+34 = 204. If you have
difficulties with simplest math - I think we've learned such things
when being 8 or 9 years old - and if you need more than five seconds
for that just pick from the simple language feature suggestions above
instead.
> Well, not
> really. Perhaps the program generating that data could print that value.
> Or I could count columns and rows and work it out. But I don't really
> want to have to hardcode that value inside [].
Use an identity relation, use flexible arrays; there's many options
(if you don't want to count; which isn't necessary as explained).
(You can also use "your languages" if you feel more comfortable. I
really don't care.)
>
> Maybe I will regenerate that data (perhaps it will be included from some
> file that I don't even look at) then I'd have to update the number.
The question is; is that a fixed entity or a variable entity? - In
the former case you'd use (in Algol 68) an identity relation, and
in the latter case - if it needs to carry over time array elements
of varying number - use a FLEX array; that's what they are for.
(For both variants you need no specific bounds.)
>
> It just shouldn't be necessary.
And it isn't. (As explained and shown a couple times meanwhile.)
>
> The largest set of data I've included this way I think was 100M numbers.
> That was testing embedding. But I have included actual binary data (eg.
> images and executables) like this too.
I think hard-coding 10^8 numbers is not the wisest implementation,
to say the least, but without knowing the details I won't discuss
that; so let's just accept that the math (counting) is impractical
and one of the other two options will be applied to store the data
in-memory when using Algol 68.
But would you really inline such amounts of data? - Or did you mean
to read them in from external media? - But then you cannot use the
initializer lists. - Whatever might apply for you, it doesn't seem
to be a clever approach.
BTW, as said, I most probably wouldn't store these amounts of data
in-memory, but I'd also have some doubts whether a language like
Algol 68, and specifically the Genie interpreter could handle that
amount of data in the first place; after all the "Genie" appears
to me to not have been trimmed to a low data space-consumption.
And a quick test confirms that: "a68g: abend: not enough memory."
So you'd have to use more intelligent solutions to process huge
amounts of data with Genie. Or switch to other languages; I'm sure
"C" does not have that issue since you're there operating on the
lowest level.)
>
>>> I was really interested at one time, and I learnt about it from a book.
>>
>> Then I wonder about your problems knowing or understanding what
>> was even explicitly explained to you in the posts of the thread.
>
> It was about 45 years ago, and I never managed to try it out for real
> until A68G came about.
That's not much different from myself; I had read my first (and back
then only) Algol 68 book 40+ years ago, then I paused these decades
completely, and just recently started again using it. - The fine thing
is that Algol 68 is so consistent a language that it was easy to get
into it again. - A pity that it wasn't like that with your knowledge.
But anyway; we've already pointed out a couple things you ought to
know; nonetheless you're after the third post still ignoring them.
>
> Those decades of real-life experience (whatever your opinions about
> that), opened my eyes more to its practicial deficiencies.
Which ones? (Compared to the languages existing back then?)
> It's clearly a language that belongs more in academia.
That's actually an additional "pro", that it's also usable as language
to teach and learn!
Janis
> [...]
Back to comp.lang.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-01 16:00 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-01 20:54 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-02 07:33 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-02 09:50 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-02 11:10 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-02 11:44 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-02 13:12 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-02 13:23 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-03 00:42 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 15:03 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-03 16:40 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 17:00 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-03 21:02 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 20:34 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-03 22:35 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 23:37 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-04 07:16 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 11:10 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 16:46 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 16:17 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-04 17:26 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 17:49 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-04 18:38 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 19:30 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 21:04 +0100
Homebrew languages (was: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ?) bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 00:39 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:52 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-05 14:02 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 18:28 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 21:14 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 17:32 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-03 20:28 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-03 20:10 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-03 22:31 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 12:24 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-04 17:02 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:25 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-05 14:12 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-05 14:28 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-06 08:29 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 14:18 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 15:58 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-07 21:22 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-07 23:13 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-08 03:17 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-08 03:50 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-08 04:47 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-08 12:42 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-08 21:37 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-09 20:34 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-09 21:08 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-09 16:58 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-08 11:34 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-09 17:16 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-09 19:11 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-09 20:58 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-10 13:56 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-10 20:52 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-11 12:53 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-11 20:51 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-06 17:14 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-06 19:41 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 22:01 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-08 12:24 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-07 23:33 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-04 00:35 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-04 07:07 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 14:57 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-05 23:59 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 01:03 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-06 07:40 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 10:59 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-06 16:59 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 17:58 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-06 20:14 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-06 22:16 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-06 22:47 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-07 14:34 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-07 15:42 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-07 16:50 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-07 19:49 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-07 20:01 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-08 00:26 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-08 01:54 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-08 14:00 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-08 15:24 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-10 00:11 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-10 00:43 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-11-10 09:08 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-10 13:28 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2025-11-10 10:11 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-10 11:02 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-10 15:00 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2025-11-10 15:52 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-10 17:05 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-10 10:10 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk> - 2025-11-10 15:48 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-07 17:59 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-07 18:39 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-12 11:01 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-12 20:47 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-12 22:22 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-12 23:28 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-13 01:31 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2025-11-13 09:35 +0100
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-13 11:37 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 01:05 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2025-11-04 01:24 +0000
Re: Algol 68 - array of procedures aligned at index 0 ? Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2025-11-04 02:28 +0000
csiph-web