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 9 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 Next page →
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-11 10:07 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j4htnl$hfl$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3611 |
In article <20110911090645.3b2b1f68.steveo@eircom.net>, Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> wrote: >On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 23:07:43 -0700 >Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > >> Try >> 999.999,999 >> Is it 999 and 999 thousand 999 millionths or 999 thousand 999 and 999 >> thousandths? > > I have never seen separators after the decimal point, so it's >the latter. I have. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Quadibloc <jsavard@ecn.ab.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-11 06:48 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7cefde68-bea9-4c31-9dd5-5dfda5d4feeb@j1g2000yqn.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #3612 |
On Sep 11, 3:07 am, n...@cam.ac.uk wrote: > In article <20110911090645.3b2b1f68.ste...@eircom.net>, > Ahem A Rivet's Shot <ste...@eircom.net> wrote: > >On Sat, 10 Sep 2011 23:07:43 -0700 > >Gene Wirchenko <ge...@ocis.net> wrote: > > >> Try > >> 999.999,999 > >> Is it 999 and 999 thousand 999 millionths or 999 thousand 999 and 999 > >> thousandths? > > > I have never seen separators after the decimal point, so it's > >the latter. > > I have. Usually, the separator after the decimal point is a space, every five digits, though. Using commas or periods as separators after the decimal point is not the usual practice; it's much less common. But, indeed, it is possible. John Savard
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-11 08:26 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j4i9cj$ijk$3@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3609 |
On 9/11/2011 2:07 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:08:10 -0700, Patrick Scheible<kkt@zipcon.net> > wrote: > >> jmfbahciv<See.above@aol.com> writes: >> >>> Patrick Scheible wrote: >>>> jmfbahciv<See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Patrick Scheible wrote: >>>>>> Stephen Fuld<SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 9/2/2011 8:46 AM, Robert Wessel wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> snip >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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.. 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. >>>> >>>> You can usually figure out what's being used by looking.... >>> >>> With what? A divining rod? ;-) >> >> If there are two different separator symbols in use, the one on the >> right is the decimal and the one(s) on the left are separating thousands >>from hundreds, millions from hundred thousands, etc. >> >> If the same separator symbol is used more than once, it's separating >> thousands from hundreds, etc. >> >> If the separator symbol is used exactly once, if it's not between the >> third and the fourth digit from the right, it's a decimal point. >> >> It's only ambiguous if the number could have an integer value between >> 1,000 and 999,999 or could have a decimal value between 1.000 and >> 999.999. (In that case, you look through the same table or document for >> another number that isn't in the ambiguous range. > > Try > 999.999,999 > Is it 999 and 999 thousand 999 millionths or 999 thousand 999 and 999 > thousandths? > I can't recall ever seeing commas in the fractional part of a number.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-11 13:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j4i7su$iqv$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3614 |
In article <j4i9cj$ijk$3@dont-email.me>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >On 9/11/2011 2:07 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: >> >> Try >> 999.999,999 >> Is it 999 and 999 thousand 999 millionths or 999 thousand 999 and 999 >> thousandths? > >I can't recall ever seeing commas in the fractional part of a number. I can. Spaces were FAR more common, but I have seen commas in some old tables - though I can't remember HOW old. It could well have been something that went out of use in the late 19th century (and, of course, tables with large numbers of digits were rare before that). Or it might have been 1920s or 1930s. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-11 07:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <864o0jywm5.fsf@zipcon.net> |
| In reply to | #3609 |
Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> writes: > On Tue, 06 Sep 2011 09:08:10 -0700, Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> > wrote: > >>jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >> >>> Patrick Scheible wrote: >>>> jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> writes: >>>> >>>>> Patrick Scheible wrote: >>>>>> Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> writes: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 9/2/2011 8:46 AM, Robert Wessel wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> snip >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 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.. 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. >>>> >>>> You can usually figure out what's being used by looking.... >>> >>> With what? A divining rod? ;-) >> >>If there are two different separator symbols in use, the one on the >>right is the decimal and the one(s) on the left are separating thousands >>from hundreds, millions from hundred thousands, etc. >> >>If the same separator symbol is used more than once, it's separating >>thousands from hundreds, etc. >> >>If the separator symbol is used exactly once, if it's not between the >>third and the fourth digit from the right, it's a decimal point. >> >>It's only ambiguous if the number could have an integer value between >>1,000 and 999,999 or could have a decimal value between 1.000 and >>999.999. (In that case, you look through the same table or document for >>another number that isn't in the ambiguous range. > > Try > 999.999,999 > Is it 999 and 999 thousand 999 millionths or 999 thousand 999 and 999 > thousandths? 999 thousand 999 and 999/1000. Usually we don't divide the decimal places into groups of three, so 999 and 999999/1000000 would be written 999.999999 (are there localities where the decimal places are divided into groups of three?) -- Patrick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-19 19:15 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <j7n0jf$5nb$1@news.task.gda.pl> |
| In reply to | #3406 |
jmfbahciv 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? 123_456_789 Best regards, Piotr Wyderski
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patrick Scheible <kkt@zipcon.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-19 14:45 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <867h401wra.fsf@zipcon.net> |
| In reply to | #4269 |
Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> writes: > jmfbahciv 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? > > 123_456_789 So that's -1122, right? -- Patrick
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Charlie Gibbs" <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-19 17:13 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <892.344T1721T10335030@kltpzyxm.invalid> |
| In reply to | #4272 |
In article <867h401wra.fsf@zipcon.net>, kkt@zipcon.net (Patrick Scheible) writes: > Piotr Wyderski <peter.pan@neverland.mil> writes: > >> jmfbahciv 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? >> >> 123_456_789 > > So that's -1122, right? Hey, I think I've seen that error code. I was wondering what it meant. -- /~\ cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs) \ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way. X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855. / \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-20 13:38 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PM0004AFBAEC3652DC@ac81532f.ipt.aol.com> |
| In reply to | #4269 |
Piotr Wyderski wrote: > jmfbahciv 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? > > 123_456_789 Which could be interpreted as a bit shift character. /BAH
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | blmblm@myrealbox.com <blmblm.myrealbox@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-10-27 09:01 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <9gsl06F82qU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #4282 |
In article <PM0004AFBAEC3652DC@ac81532f.ipt.aol.com>, jmfbahciv <See.above@aol.com> wrote: > Piotr Wyderski wrote: > > jmfbahciv 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? > > > > 123_456_789 > > Which could be interpreted as a bit shift character. (Tidying up some old messages, came across this one to which I was going to reply .... ) Underscore as bit shift .... Is there a programming language that does that? (Must be or you wouldn't say it?) -- B. L. Massingill ObDisclaimer: I don't speak for my employers; they return the favor.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-02 20:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <j3rt2o$8l8$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3389 |
On 9/2/2011 3:08 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote: > On 9/2/2011 8:46 AM, Robert Wessel wrote: > > snip > >> 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. Actually it's not bad. I've got pretty near the hole functionality of PL/I fixed-point pictured output in less than 170 lines of PL/I code. Of course it's a bit simpler than it would be in C because the PL/I compiler does all the work of analyzing the pictures, but in C you'd have to keep the picture as a character string and analyze it at run time. 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. commas vs. periods, it's a cultural thing. As I posted previously I believe Multics had some formatting routines over and above what pictures offered that did this sort of thing.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 06:58 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <20110903065833.9735ee89.steveo@eircom.net> |
| In reply to | #3400 |
On Fri, 02 Sep 2011 20:41:22 -0400 Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: > On 9/2/2011 3:08 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote: > > 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. > > commas vs. periods, it's a cultural thing. As I posted previously I > believe Multics had some formatting routines over and above what > pictures offered that did this sort of thing. The ICU library has routines for formatting numbers correctly given a language spec and a number. -- Steve O'Hara-Smith | Directable Mirror Arrays C:>WIN | A better way to focus the sun The computer obeys and wins. | licences available see You lose and Bill collects. | http://www.sohara.org/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 07:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j3sgtc$d9f$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3400 |
In article <j3rt2o$8l8$1@dont-email.me>, Peter Flass <Peter_Flass@Yahoo.com> wrote: >On 9/2/2011 3:08 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote: > >>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. > >commas vs. periods, it's a cultural thing. As I posted previously I >believe Multics had some formatting routines over and above what >pictures offered that did this sort of thing. The traditional separator in tables was a space, and usually every 4 or 5 digits. That was supported by several Autocodes, including for input. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-02 21:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4E61B30F.5020508@bitblocks.com> |
| In reply to | #3389 |
On 9/2/11 12:08 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote:
> On 9/2/2011 8:46 AM, Robert Wessel wrote:
>
> snip
>
>> But I've always though that some additional formatting in printf
>> formatting strings would be an obvious feature to add to C.
Checkout plan9's fmtinstall(). Allows you to provide your own formatting functions.
For instance, in the example below %X is added to print a user defined type.
typedef struct { double r, i; } Complex;
int
Xfmt(Fmt *f)
{
Complex c;
c = va_arg(f–>args, Complex);
return fmtprint(f, "(%g,%g)", c.r, c.i);
}
main(...)
{
Complex x = (Complex){ 1.5, –2.3 };
fmtinstall('X', Xfmt);
print("x = %X\n", x);
}
>
>
> 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. I would like to see the "digit
> separated" format be another editing code so it would be trivial for a programmer to specify it
> without having to create a full picture clause, which would be many more characters to input and
> thus less frequently used.
>
> The second most useful feature I suspect would be a floating currency indicator. Once you get beyond
> those two, I think the utility falls off pretty quickly, though the ability to specify that negative
> values should be a different color might be nice. But I suspect that say the ability to have CR or
> DB automatically appended to the value depending on sign is pretty unimportant.
>
> But digit separators would help in a lot of places.
Ansi C has now has a ' (single quote) flag which prints a number
in a locale specific manner. For instance (on Linux):
$ cat xx.c
#include <locale.h>
#include <stdio.h>
main(int argc, char** argv)
{
setlocale(LC_ALL, argv[1]);
printf("%'f\n", 34587706689349.125);
}
$ cc xx.c
$ a.out en_DK
34.587.706.689.349,125000
$ a.out en_GB
34,587,706,689,349.125000
$ a.out en_IN
3,45,87,70,66,89,349.125000
Of course, the challenge is in making programmers use this!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Stephen Fuld <SFuld@alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 09:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <j3tj7q$8md$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #3402 |
On 9/2/2011 9:54 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
> On 9/2/11 12:08 PM, Stephen Fuld wrote:
snip
>> 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. I
>> would like to see the "digit
>> separated" format be another editing code so it would be trivial for a
>> programmer to specify it
>> without having to create a full picture clause, which would be many
>> more characters to input and
>> thus less frequently used.
snip
> Ansi C has now has a ' (single quote) flag which prints a number
> in a locale specific manner. For instance (on Linux):
>
> $ cat xx.c
> #include <locale.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
> main(int argc, char** argv)
> {
> setlocale(LC_ALL, argv[1]);
> printf("%'f\n", 34587706689349.125);
> }
> $ cc xx.c
> $ a.out en_DK
> 34.587.706.689.349,125000
> $ a.out en_GB
> 34,587,706,689,349.125000
> $ a.out en_IN
> 3,45,87,70,66,89,349.125000
>
> Of course, the challenge is in making programmers use this!
Wow, I didn't know that C could do this. I suspect some others here
also didn't know. Is it implemented in most of the popular C compilers?
I agree that the challenge is getting programmers to use it, but at
least it seems pretty easy to use, which is a big advantage.
A couple of questions, as I am not really a C programmer. Does it work
for integers as well? Is there something like a site settable default
locale so that all most programmers have to do is add the single quotes?
Does the length specified in the format string still apply? If so, do
they interact in a reasonable manner?
Thanks for the information. I had pretty much given up hope.
--
- Stephen Fuld
(e-mail address disguised to prevent spam)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 16:42 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j3thse$hdc$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3409 |
In article <j3tj7q$8md$1@dont-email.me>,
Stephen Fuld <SFuld@Alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
>On 9/2/2011 9:54 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
>
>> Ansi C has now has a ' (single quote) flag which prints a number
>> in a locale specific manner. For instance (on Linux):
>>
>> printf("%'f\n", 34587706689349.125);
>
>Wow, I didn't know that C could do this. I suspect some others here
>also didn't know. Is it implemented in most of the popular C compilers?
I doubt it, considering that it is NOT an ANSI C feature. God
alone knows where Bakul Shah got that idea from.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 21:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <Pzw8q.337331$Ln1.224700@news.usenetserver.com> |
| In reply to | #3411 |
nmm1@cam.ac.uk writes:
>In article <j3tj7q$8md$1@dont-email.me>,
>Stephen Fuld <SFuld@Alumni.cmu.edu.invalid> wrote:
>>On 9/2/2011 9:54 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
>>
>>> Ansi C has now has a ' (single quote) flag which prints a number
>>> in a locale specific manner. For instance (on Linux):
>>>
>>> printf("%'f\n", 34587706689349.125);
>>
>>Wow, I didn't know that C could do this. I suspect some others here
>>also didn't know. Is it implemented in most of the popular C compilers?
>
>I doubt it, considering that it is NOT an ANSI C feature. God
>alone knows where Bakul Shah got that idea from.
>
It is, however, part of POSIX:
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/printf.html
scott
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 11:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4E626B94.1020203@bitblocks.com> |
| In reply to | #3409 |
On 9/3/11 9:05 AM, Stephen Fuld wrote:
> On 9/2/2011 9:54 PM, Bakul Shah wrote:
>
>> Ansi C has now has a ' (single quote) flag which prints a number
>> in a locale specific manner. For instance (on Linux):
>>
>> $ cat xx.c
>> #include <locale.h>
>> #include <stdio.h>
>> main(int argc, char** argv)
>> {
>> setlocale(LC_ALL, argv[1]);
>> printf("%'f\n", 34587706689349.125);
>> }
>> $ cc xx.c
>> $ a.out en_DK
>> 34.587.706.689.349,125000
>> $ a.out en_GB
>> 34,587,706,689,349.125000
>> $ a.out en_IN
>> 3,45,87,70,66,89,349.125000
>>
>> Of course, the challenge is in making programmers use this!
>
> Wow, I didn't know that C could do this. I suspect some others here also didn't know. Is it
> implemented in most of the popular C compilers?
>
> I agree that the challenge is getting programmers to use it, but at least it seems pretty easy to
> use, which is a big advantage.
>
> A couple of questions, as I am not really a C programmer. Does it work for integers as well? Is
> there something like a site settable default locale so that all most programmers have to do is add
> the single quotes? Does the length specified in the format string still apply? If so, do they
> interact in a reasonable manner?
Yes it works for all integer types and for given length, 0, space, +, -.
But I have done only light testing. I have used this feature on Linux,
FreeBSD & OS X, though the last two have some bugs. I think it works on
other BSDs too. Don't know about Windows.
The printf(3) man pages on BSD/Linux/OS X say the function is standard
compliant but I could not locate this flag in C89, C99 or C1X. So this
is probably originally a glibc extension. Nick is (half) right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | nmm1@cam.ac.uk |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 19:18 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <j3tr16$i6p$1@gosset.csi.cam.ac.uk> |
| In reply to | #3414 |
In article <4E626B94.1020203@bitblocks.com>, Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> wrote: > >The printf(3) man pages on BSD/Linux/OS X say the function is standard >compliant but I could not locate this flag in C89, C99 or C1X. So this >is probably originally a glibc extension. Nick is (half) right. Sigh. I see that I need to give an elementary lesson on how ISO language standardisation works. An invalid conversion specifier (such as that is) is undefined behaviour, and therefore the standard says nothing about what happens. De nada, zilch, nihilum. It is therefore compliant for a compiler to behave like that, or to subtly corrupt all results it produces. Or to vary the behaviour according to the phase of the moon, or anything. And they do behave like that. Yes, it is probably a glibc extension, but I have no idea whether it has been taken up by other libraries and, if so, which. Nor do I much care - if you rely on non-standard features without checking each and every set of compiler and library documentation that you might run the program under, you are on your own. Regards, Nick Maclaren.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bakul Shah <usenet@bitblocks.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-09-03 13:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4E62888D.4060306@bitblocks.com> |
| In reply to | #3418 |
On 9/3/11 11:18 AM, nmm1@cam.ac.uk wrote: > In article<4E626B94.1020203@bitblocks.com>, > Bakul Shah<usenet@bitblocks.com> wrote: >> >> The printf(3) man pages on BSD/Linux/OS X say the function is standard >> compliant but I could not locate this flag in C89, C99 or C1X. So this >> is probably originally a glibc extension. Nick is (half) right. > > Sigh. I see that I need to give an elementary lesson on how ISO > language standardisation works. How do you think languages get extended? While people like you just whine, someone actually goes and implements a useful feature. If it is found to be useful to a lot of people, it might even get standardized. The fact it is available so widely should be seen as a positive. Most of us don't have a need for maximal portability and don't care if our program runs on a z80 as well as the biggest supercomputer so the information may still be useful to people. You were of course right the ' flag is not in Ansi C. That (half) was a silly joke not worth explaining. But I also added it to see what reaction it will provoke from you. Sorry about that:-)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 9 of 13 — ← Prev page 1 … 7 8 [9] 10 11 … 13 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.arch
csiph-web