Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.forth > #53416
| From | rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.forth |
| Subject | Re: Question on exponentiation |
| Date | 2016-12-18 19:12 -0500 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <o378ij$mb2$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <o35s9m$ssa$1@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl> <o35s5g$vnu$1@dont-email.me> <87oa0827si.fsf@nightsong.com> <o373bm$351$1@dont-email.me> <87k2aw26jm.fsf@nightsong.com> |
On 12/18/2016 5:53 PM, Paul Rubin wrote: > rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> writes: >>> You really expect -x**2 and x**2 to be the same thing? >> What happens in other languages. I believe most do exactly that. > > None that I can think of offhand do that. Similarly in mathematical > notation, -x**2 is -(x**2) where the **2 is written as a superscript. From wikipedia... "There exist differing conventions concerning the unary operator − (usually read "minus"). In written or printed mathematics, the expression −32 is interpreted to mean 0 − (32) = −9,[1][5] but in some applications and programming languages, notably Microsoft Office Excel (and other spreadsheet applications) and the programming language bc, unary operators have a higher priority than binary operators, that is, the unary minus (negation or +/-) has higher precedence than exponentiation, so in those languages −32 will be interpreted as (−3)2 = 9.[6]" I noticed that C does not have an exponential operator. So they avoided the issue altogether. -- Rick C
Back to comp.lang.forth | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Question on exponentiation Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 07:37 +0200
Re: Question on exponentiation Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-17 21:45 -0800
Re: Question on exponentiation Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 07:46 +0200
Re: Question on exponentiation albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-18 12:35 +0100
Re: Question on exponentiation Ron Aaron <rambamist@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 13:33 +0200
Re: Question on exponentiation Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> - 2016-12-18 18:07 +0000
Re: Question on exponentiation albert@cherry.spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2016-12-19 14:00 +0100
Re: Question on exponentiation rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 15:45 -0500
Re: Question on exponentiation Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-18 14:26 -0800
Re: Question on exponentiation rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 17:43 -0500
Re: Question on exponentiation Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2016-12-18 14:53 -0800
Re: Question on exponentiation rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 19:12 -0500
Re: Question on exponentiation Julian Fondren <julian.fondren@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 16:56 -0800
Re: Question on exponentiation Andrew Haley <andrew29@littlepinkcloud.invalid> - 2016-12-19 02:52 -0600
Re: Question on exponentiation john <anon@example.com> - 2016-12-18 12:21 +0000
Re: Question on exponentiation Cecil Bayona <cbayona@cbayona.com> - 2016-12-18 12:14 -0600
Re: Question on exponentiation rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-12-18 15:48 -0500
csiph-web