Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.arch > #3118 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-08-23 10:48 -0700 |
| Last post | 2011-08-29 09:18 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 246 — 39 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.arch
Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-23 10:48 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-23 16:24 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-24 07:20 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-23 23:22 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-24 14:38 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-25 17:42 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 09:45 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 18:03 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-26 20:31 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-26 20:08 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 02:35 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-27 15:27 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 13:41 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-27 17:34 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 17:40 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-27 17:50 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-28 23:49 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-27 22:40 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-28 19:33 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-29 13:56 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 09:07 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-29 17:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 11:56 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-08-29 16:12 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-29 20:46 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Kalle Olavi Niemitalo <kon@iki.fi> - 2011-08-30 07:48 +0300
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-30 08:22 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-31 11:34 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-29 22:22 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Andrew Reilly <areilly---@bigpond.net.au> - 2011-08-30 11:17 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-30 12:35 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-30 07:02 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-30 15:18 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-30 15:12 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-08-31 08:30 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 09:54 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 10:09 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-01 18:01 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 12:25 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! sidd <sidd@situ.com> - 2011-09-01 20:02 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Elliott Roper <nospam@yrl.co.uk> - 2011-09-02 10:27 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 11:33 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 08:09 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 08:12 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 15:50 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 08:49 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 17:00 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 15:55 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-03 18:06 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 07:58 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 15:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-02 07:42 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Andreas Eder <andreas_eder@gmx.net> - 2011-09-02 17:51 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! sidd <sidd@situ.com> - 2011-08-31 12:11 -0400
Complex Number Representation nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-02 21:22 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-30 07:08 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-31 10:39 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-31 08:00 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-31 18:38 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-08-31 13:18 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-08-31 19:09 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-30 00:19 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Brett Davis <ggtgp@yahoo.com> - 2011-08-31 23:46 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-31 09:56 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-01 08:23 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-31 14:02 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 04:02 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-01 19:42 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-08-31 23:20 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "James Van Buskirk" <not_valid@comcast.net> - 2011-09-12 15:53 -0600
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-12 22:31 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-12 22:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-12 21:00 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-13 10:10 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-13 04:58 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-01 07:25 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> - 2011-09-01 10:37 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-01 18:25 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-09-01 19:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 12:30 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-01 12:38 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-01 17:13 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-01 14:48 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-01 22:49 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-01 18:08 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2011-09-02 00:26 -0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Andy \"Krazy\" Glew" <andy@SPAM.comp-arch.net> - 2011-09-02 05:06 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 10:46 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-09-02 12:08 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-02 13:54 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-03 14:57 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-03 15:33 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-03 13:42 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-04 08:46 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-04 08:05 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-04 17:44 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-04 08:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-04 18:52 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-04 08:55 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 16:46 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-04 13:21 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 14:03 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 14:15 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 18:52 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 15:00 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 21:02 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 19:22 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-05 07:09 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 04:48 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-04 20:18 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-04 03:53 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-04 13:21 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 03:57 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-04 08:47 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 04:03 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 14:30 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 04:49 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-04 15:53 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 09:55 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> - 2011-10-19 19:17 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-04 19:54 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 20:56 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 19:16 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-04 16:26 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-05 13:45 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2011-09-05 12:09 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-05 20:51 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-06 10:57 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-06 19:43 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-06 10:55 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-09-06 11:36 +0100
OT English Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! wclodius@lost-alamos.pet (William Clodius) - 2011-09-05 13:33 -0600
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-05 23:12 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2011-09-07 09:44 -0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-03 13:41 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-09-03 21:36 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-03 20:18 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-04 08:31 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 13:11 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-09-05 17:14 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-07 09:07 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-07 12:15 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-07 08:37 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-07 13:50 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-07 09:21 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2011-09-08 08:42 +0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-08 14:10 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-08 19:09 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-05 22:50 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-06 13:45 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-06 09:08 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-07 14:13 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-07 09:42 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2011-09-08 09:05 +0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-08 14:10 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 04:49 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-08 14:09 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-09 03:17 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-09-10 23:07 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-11 09:06 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-11 10:07 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-11 06:48 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-11 08:26 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-11 13:00 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-11 07:36 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> - 2011-10-19 19:15 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-10-19 14:45 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2011-10-19 17:13 -0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-10-20 13:38 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-27 09:01 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 20:41 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-03 06:58 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-03 07:19 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2011-09-02 21:54 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-09-03 09:05 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-03 16:42 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-09-03 21:00 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2011-09-03 11:01 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-03 19:18 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> - 2011-09-03 13:05 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 08:09 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2011-09-03 21:34 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Jean-Marc Bourguet <jm@bourguet.org> - 2011-09-04 22:15 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2011-09-04 21:07 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-02 20:21 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Tim Shoppa <shoppa@trailing-edge.com> - 2011-09-06 09:32 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-07 09:09 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-07 07:17 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-07 16:00 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bill Findlay <yaldnif.w@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2011-09-07 16:40 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-07 09:57 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-07 09:39 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-07 20:47 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-08 14:09 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> - 2011-09-08 09:13 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-08 18:59 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-09 15:21 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-09 12:48 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-10 06:27 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-09 23:04 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2011-09-08 08:57 +0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> - 2011-09-08 14:10 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2011-09-08 07:50 -0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-08 12:07 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> - 2011-09-08 12:10 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-08 17:38 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Seebs <usenet-nospam@seebs.net> - 2011-09-09 03:43 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-08 12:21 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> - 2011-09-01 17:09 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-02 08:59 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-07 09:07 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-07 20:03 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 16:55 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-09 03:52 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-01 15:57 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-10-02 05:51 +1100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-10-07 11:31 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-07 14:08 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-07 14:18 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2011-09-07 14:05 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Morten Reistad <first@last.name> - 2011-09-07 20:54 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 05:27 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! timcaffrey@aol.com (Tim McCaffrey) - 2011-09-16 18:48 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! sidd <sidd@situ.com> - 2011-09-07 18:53 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 04:37 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-08 10:19 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! kenney@cix.compulink.co.uk - 2011-09-08 05:14 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-09-11 12:58 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2011-09-12 10:01 +0100
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-12 19:35 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-12 09:25 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2011-09-12 13:27 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-09-12 10:41 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> - 2011-09-12 11:34 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-13 05:40 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Michael Black <et472@ncf.ca> - 2011-09-12 15:53 -0400
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-12 13:08 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 04:14 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-09-07 11:31 -0700
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 05:35 +1000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Bernd Felsche <berfel@innovative.iinet.net.au> - 2011-09-08 08:40 +0800
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-09-07 20:25 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> - 2011-09-08 16:58 +0000
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-09-08 12:31 -0500
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2011-08-30 13:46 +0200
Re: Solving the Floating-Point Goldilocks Problem! Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> - 2011-08-29 09:18 -0700
Page 6 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 13 Next page →
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 13:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0004AC1D76853D59@aca24d60.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #3408 |
nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > In article <PM0004AC0A5C77E22C@aca221f7.ipt.aol.com>, > jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>Patrick Scheible wrote: >>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> writes: >>> >>>> 34587706689349 times. >>>> >>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, but >>>> these could be overcome. >>> >>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, it's still easier to read >>> than no separators at all. >> >>Not spaces.. Which do you chose? The American use of comma or >>the European use of period? In one side of the pond, the period >>implies fractions. We couldn't decide in the 70s. > > Er, you got the commas from us! It's not a transpondian thing, > but a transditchian one. And why not spaces? Seriously. They're non-printing characters. Sometimes spacing (e.g. widths) can't be counted by a human eye. Tables are problematic if an item "overflows" including the spacing. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 14:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j3vsus$o9n$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3440 |
In article <PM0004AC1D76853D59@aca24d60.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 34587706689349 times. >>>>> >>>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>>>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, but >>>>> these could be overcome. >>>> >>>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, it's still easier to read >>>> than no separators at all. >>> >>>Not spaces.. Which do you chose? The American use of comma or >>>the European use of period? In one side of the pond, the period >>>implies fractions. We couldn't decide in the 70s. >> >> Er, you got the commas from us! It's not a transpondian thing, >> but a transditchian one. And why not spaces? Seriously. > >They're non-printing characters. Sometimes spacing (e.g. widths) >can't be counted by a human eye. None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. Fortran's input rules (a) were fixed-width and (b) were regarded as a mistake within a decade after they were invented. That happens when people specify something that has never been done before. >Tables are problematic if an item "overflows" including the spacing. They are equally problematic without that. If you run out of space, you either have to truncate the data or split the object. Sometimes, you can split between objects, but not always. And they work perfectly well where some numbers can be shortened, as in telephone numbers. Just don't use polymorphic data fields (which are undesirable, anyway), and don't use space as a separator. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 14:15 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j40f90$7tf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3441 |
On 9/4/2011 9:03 AM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > > None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format > data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces > to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, > Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful > ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces within a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, FORTRAN, SNOBOL, RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 18:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j40dta$qjv$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3447 |
In article <j40f90$7tf$1@dont-email.me>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format >> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces >> to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, >> Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful >> ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. > >Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was >column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces within >a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, FORTRAN, SNOBOL, >RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. Don't you think that you are being just a little parochial? Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 15:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j40hs3$pka$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3448 |
On 9/4/2011 1:52 PM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > In article<j40f90$7tf$1@dont-email.me>, > Peter Flass<Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >>> >>> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format >>> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces >>> to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, >>> Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful >>> ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. >> >> Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was >> column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces within >> a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, FORTRAN, SNOBOL, >> RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. > > Don't you think that you are being just a little parochial? > Seemed like a good selection to me. You said "None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code...have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces to be significant." I gave you a few that did. I'll concede the "free format data entry" part.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 21:02 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j40lfr$ark$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3452 |
In article <j40hs3$pka$1@dont-email.me>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format >>>> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces >>>> to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, >>>> Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful >>>> ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. >>> >>> Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was >>> column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces within >>> a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, FORTRAN, SNOBOL, >>> RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. >> >> Don't you think that you are being just a little parochial? > >Seemed like a good selection to me. You said "None of the languages >that have allowed spaces in code...have ever made the mistake of >allowing the number of spaces to be significant." I gave you a few that >did. I'll concede the "free format data entry" part. I can assure you that the number of spaces in tokens in Fortran fixed-format is NOT significant; I can't be bothered to recheck the others, but I am pretty sure that was true of Cobol, too. Oh, and no IBM System/360 assembler allowed spaces in tokens, nor I think did Snobol. That was the context. If you wish to twist the thread to refer to other linguistic aspects, I am not interested in playing such games. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 19:22 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j41179$4i9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3456 |
On 9/4/2011 4:02 PM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > In article<j40hs3$pka$1@dont-email.me>, > Peter Flass<Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format >>>>> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of spaces >>>>> to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes that did, >>>>> Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful >>>>> ones? Embedded spaces in numbers really are no problem. >>>> >>>> Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was >>>> column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces within >>>> a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, FORTRAN, SNOBOL, >>>> RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. >>> >>> Don't you think that you are being just a little parochial? >> >> Seemed like a good selection to me. You said "None of the languages >> that have allowed spaces in code...have ever made the mistake of >> allowing the number of spaces to be significant." I gave you a few that >> did. I'll concede the "free format data entry" part. > > I can assure you that the number of spaces in tokens in Fortran > fixed-format is NOT significant; I can't be bothered to recheck > the others, but I am pretty sure that was true of Cobol, too. > Oh, and no IBM System/360 assembler allowed spaces in tokens, > nor I think did Snobol. > > That was the context. If you wish to twist the thread to refer > to other linguistic aspects, I am not interested in playing such > games. > I guess I was misunderstanding what you wrote. I thought you were saying the number of spaces>1 didn't matter, and of course the languages I mentioned are all column-oriented, to some extent. I don't think _any_ language has allowed spaces within tokens (except character strings, of course, and comments if you consider a comment a token. FORTRAN is the exception that just ignores all spaces anywhere.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 07:09 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j41p3h$dii$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3460 |
In article <j41179$4i9$1@dont-email.me>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: > >I guess I was misunderstanding what you wrote. I thought you were >saying the number of spaces>1 didn't matter, and of course the languages >I mentioned are all column-oriented, to some extent. I don't think >_any_ language has allowed spaces within tokens (except character >strings, of course, and comments if you consider a comment a token. >FORTRAN is the exception that just ignores all spaces anywhere. As I said, several have, successfully. With at least one stropping mode, Algol 68 did, and it was common for input in Autocodes and may have been in the code as well. It could trivially be added to Fortran, C and most other languages, too, in this special case of spaces within digit strings. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 04:48 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9chvg2FjslU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3447 |
Peter Flass wrote > nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote >> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format >> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of >> spaces to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes >> that did, Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other successful ones? Embedded spaces in numbers >> really are no problem. > Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was > column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces > within a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, > FORTRAN, SNOBOL, RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. Fortran was barely column oriented, that only separated the line numbering from the body of the statement and the sequence number. It didnt even use spaces at all, they could be left out if you were that stupid.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Walter Bushell <proto@panix.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 20:18 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <proto-E96F6F.20182504092011@news.panix.com> |
| In reply to | #3450 |
In article <9chvg2FjslU1@mid.individual.net>, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote: > Peter Flass wrote > > nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote > > >> None of the languages that have allowed spaces in code or free-format > >> data entry have ever made the mistake of allowing the number of > >> spaces to be significant. Have you ever used any of the Autocodes > >> that did, Algol 68 with a relevant stropping mode or any of the other > >> successful ones? Embedded spaces in numbers > >> really are no problem. > > > Nearly everything before ALGOL and PL/I, and a lit after, was > > column-oriented, whether or not they considered the number spaces > > within a statement to be significant. I'm thinking of COBOL, > > FORTRAN, SNOBOL, RPG, and all IBM assemblers before Assembler-H. > > Fortran was barely column oriented, that only separated the line > numbering from the body of the statement and the sequence number. > > It didnt even use spaces at all, they could be left out if you were that > stupid. And Fortran reserves one column for continuation. Which I seldom if ever used in my own code. -- Ignorance is no protection against reality. -- Paul J Gans
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 03:53 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9cf7saF66bU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3406 |
jmfbahciv wrote > Patrick Scheible wrote >> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote >>> Robert Wessel wrote >>>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf >>>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C. >>> Yes, of course. While the full functionality of picture clauses >>> might be nice, A small subset would go a long way. The single >>> thing I would most like to see is to make it easy to print numbers >>> with separators every three characters. I get so frustrated when I >>> see things like the output of a profiling program say a routine was >>> executed >>> 34587706689349 times. >>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, >>> but these could be overcome. >> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, >> it's still easier to read than no separators at all. > Not spaces.. Spaces are best for somethings like long account numbers etc and phone numbers. They are one way to handle the ., useage variation. > Which do you chose? Spaces mostly for all except real numbers as opposed to stuff like account numbers. > The American use of comma or the European use of period? The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. > In one side of the pond, the period implies fractions. We couldn't decide in the 70s. It still hasnt been decided. But is irrelevant for some stuff like phone numbers and account numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 13:21 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0004AC1DA75099FB@aca24d60.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #3413 |
Rod Speed wrote: > jmfbahciv wrote >> Patrick Scheible wrote >>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote >>>> Robert Wessel wrote > >>>>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf >>>>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C. > >>>> Yes, of course. While the full functionality of picture clauses >>>> might be nice, A small subset would go a long way. The single >>>> thing I would most like to see is to make it easy to print numbers >>>> with separators every three characters. I get so frustrated when I >>>> see things like the output of a profiling program say a routine was >>>> executed > >>>> 34587706689349 times. > >>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, >>>> but these could be overcome. > >>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, >>> it's still easier to read than no separators at all. > >> Not spaces.. > > Spaces are best for somethings like long account numbers etc and phone numbers. That depends. If a piece of the number can be dropped, then spacing is not the way to it,, e.g., area code. For account numbers, the data enterer has to be able to identify which field goes with each string part of the collective. If it's a long number spaces tend to be difficult especially if there are sub-fields which are separated by "less" spaces than other fields. Noone can see the significance of the spacing. There also exists data records where a tab means something different than spaces. One cannot tell that difference either. > > They are one way to handle the ., useage variation. > >> Which do you chose? > > Spaces mostly for all except real numbers as opposed to stuff like account numbers. Now go talk to somebody who does data entry. > >> The American use of comma or the European use of period? > > The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. > >> In one side of the pond, the period implies fractions. We couldn't decide in the 70s. > > It still hasnt been decided. But is irrelevant for some stuff like phone numbers and account numbers. How do you format a social security number which also happens to be an account number? Note that there exists two different formats of the US' social security number. One is 3,2,4 and the other is 2,7. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 03:57 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9chsgiFpg7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3439 |
jmfbahciv wrote > Rod Speed wrote >> jmfbahciv wrote >>> Patrick Scheible wrote >>>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote >>>>> Robert Wessel wrote >>>>>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf >>>>>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C. >>>>> Yes, of course. While the full functionality of picture clauses >>>>> might be nice, A small subset would go a long way. The single >>>>> thing I would most like to see is to make it easy to print numbers >>>>> with separators every three characters. I get so frustrated when >>>>> I see things like the output of a profiling program say a routine >>>>> was executed >>>>> 34587706689349 times. >>>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. >>>>> I realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as >>>>> separators, but these could be overcome. >>>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, >>>> it's still easier to read than no separators at all. >>> Not spaces.. >> Spaces are best for somethings like long account numbers etc and >> phone numbers. > That depends. Nope, not for those two. > If a piece of the number can be dropped, then spacing is not the way to it,, e.g., area code. Yes it is when the remainder is still too long to be effective without any spaces. > For account numbers, the data enterer has to be able to > identify which field goes with each string part of the collective. There are no fields with a long account number. > If it's a long number spaces tend to be difficult Nope. > especially if there are sub-fields which are separated by "less" spaces than other fields. There are no fields with a long account number. I have just one from Virgin Money with 16 digits, with the first digit a 1, then a series of 6 0s, them the rest of the number. And its one that most users have to enter by hand for online banking. > Noone can see the significance of the spacing. There is no significance of the spacing with a 16 digit account number. > There also exists data records where a tab > means something different than spaces. Wasnt talking about data records, I was talking about account numbers and phone numbers. > One cannot tell that difference either. You can with an account number or a phone number where the spaces are just there for readability and have no significance what so ever. >> They are one way to handle the ., useage variation. >>> Which do you chose? >> Spaces mostly for all except real numbers as opposed to stuff like account numbers. > Now go talk to somebody who does data entry. Everyone does data entry with account numbers and phone numbers and anyone with even half a clue realises the problem with 16 digit account numbers that have no spaces in them. >>> The American use of comma or the European use of period? >> The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. >>> In one side of the pond, the period implies fractions. We couldn't decide in the 70s. >> It still hasnt been decided. But is irrelevant for some stuff like >> phone numbers and account numbers. > How do you format a social security number which also happens to > be an account number? Note that there exists two different formats > of the US' social security number. One is 3,2,4 and the other is 2,7. What matters is whether the system uses the spaces at all. It doesnt with account numbers and phone numbers.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 08:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ae15c516-41d7-4215-8a41-2e618763cd6e@gz5g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #3413 |
On Sep 3, 11:53 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote: > The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. Huh? English speakers are in a smaller minority than Europeans. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 04:03 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9chss0FsksU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3442 |
Quadibloc wrote > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >> jmfbahciv wrote >>> Patrick Scheible wrote >>>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote >>>>> Robert Wessel wrote >>>>>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf >>>>>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C. >>>>> Yes, of course. While the full functionality of picture clauses >>>>> might be nice, A small subset would go a long way. The single >>>>> thing I would most like to see is to make it easy to print numbers >>>>> with separators every three characters. I get so frustrated when I >>>>> see things like the output of a profiling program say a routine was >>>>> executed >>>>> 34587706689349 times. >>>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>>>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, >>>>> but these could be overcome. >>>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, >>>> it's still easier to read than no separators at all. >>> Not spaces.. >> Spaces are best for somethings like long account numbers etc and phone numbers. >> They are one way to handle the ., useage variation. >>> Which do you chose? >> Spaces mostly for all except real numbers as opposed to stuff like account numbers. >>> The American use of comma or the European use of period? >> The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. > Huh? English speakers are in a smaller minority than Europeans. Not when you include the rest of the english speaking world like north america, australia etc. The european use of period is in a small minority world wide.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 14:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j40g3s$dhg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3442 |
On 9/4/2011 11:47 AM, Quadibloc wrote: > On Sep 3, 11:53 am, "Rod Speed"<rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. > > Huh? English speakers are in a smaller minority than Europeans. > > John Savard By gosh, you're right. I had to check this and the population of Europe minus UK and Ireland is given at about 766 million. The US, Ca, AU, NZ and the UK and Ire are about 433 million if I've got all the numbers right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 04:49 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9chvinFkh6U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3449 |
Peter Flass wrote: > On 9/4/2011 11:47 AM, Quadibloc wrote: >> On Sep 3, 11:53 am, "Rod Speed"<rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the >>> minority world wide. >> >> Huh? English speakers are in a smaller minority than Europeans. >> >> John Savard > > > By gosh, you're right. I had to check this and the population of > Europe minus UK and Ireland is given at about 766 million. The US, > Ca, AU, NZ and the UK and Ire are about 433 million if I've got all > the numbers right. Pity about the number who use the period as the radix separator.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-04 15:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <cf70aa22-0e38-4936-b00d-f9c012917b31@d25g2000yqh.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #3451 |
On Sep 4, 12:49 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote: > Peter Flass wrote: > > By gosh, you're right. I had to check this and the population of > > Europe minus UK and Ireland is given at about 766 million. The US, > > Ca, AU, NZ and the UK and Ire are about 433 million if I've got all > > the numbers right. > > Pity about the number who use the period as the radix separator. You may be right about that. *Russia* uses the comma as the radix separator, India has its own system of numerals, but also uses English, as noted in this thread... Japan, I believe, uses the English- speaking world's notation. Ah, yes. China uses the decimal point and not the comma. So the economic might of the English-speaking world has indeed won out. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-05 09:55 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <9cihg5F3f5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #3458 |
Quadibloc wrote > Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >> Peter Flass wrote >>> Quadibloc wrote >>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed....@gmail.com> wrote >>>>> jmfbahciv wrote >>>>>> Patrick Scheible wrote >>>>>>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote >>>>>>>> Robert Wessel wrote >>>>>>>>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf >>>>>>>>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C. >>>>>>>> Yes, of course. While the full functionality of picture clauses >>>>>>>> might be nice, A small subset would go a long way. The single >>>>>>>> thing I would most like to see is to make it easy to print numbers >>>>>>>> with separators every three characters. I get so frustrated when I >>>>>>>> see things like the output of a profiling program say a routine was >>>>>>>> executed >>>>>>>> 34587706689349 times. >>>>>>>> It sure makes it hard to read and there is no excuse for that. I >>>>>>>> realize there are issues with commas versus spaces as separators, >>>>>>>> but these could be overcome. >>>>>>> Even if they use spaces instead of commas, >>>>>>> it's still easier to read than no separators at all. >>>>>> Not spaces.. >>>>> Spaces are best for somethings like long account numbers etc and phone numbers. >>>>> They are one way to handle the ., useage variation. >>>>>> Which do you chose? >>>>> Spaces mostly for all except real numbers as opposed to stuff like account numbers. >>>>>> The American use of comma or the European use of period? >>>>> The non european form, mainly because the europeans are in the minority world wide. >>>> Huh? English speakers are in a smaller minority than Europeans. >>>> Not when you include the rest of the english speaking world like north america, australia etc. >>>> The european use of period is in a small minority world wide. >>> By gosh, you're right. I had to check this and the population of >>> Europe minus UK and Ireland is given at about 766 million. The US, >>> Ca, AU, NZ and the UK and Ire are about 433 million if I've got all >>> the numbers right. >> Pity about the number who use the period as the radix separator. > You may be right about that. *Russia* uses the comma as the radix > separator, India has its own system of numerals, but also uses > English, as noted in this thread... Japan, I believe, uses the > English- speaking world's notation. > Ah, yes. China uses the decimal point and not the comma. So the > economic might of the English-speaking world has indeed won out. And thats clearly what I meant with my original that keeps getting deleted from the quoting, and I have restored, again. The european style of radix separator isnt seen all that much outside europe.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-19 19:17 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <j7n0nq$5nb$2@news.task.gda.pl> |
| In reply to | #3458 |
Quadibloc wrote: > *Russia* uses the comma as the radix separator So does Poland. Best regards, Piotr Wyderski
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 6 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 4 5 [6] 7 8 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch
csiph-web