Subject:
|
Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Wed, 5 May 1999 20:55:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1296 times
|
| |
|
|
John A. Tamplin <jat@liveonthenet.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to. Floating point and fixed
> point each have their proper place. Personally, what I want is an
> environment flexible enough to accomodate what each person wants and
> modular enough to do it without negatively impacting people who don't
> want it.
I see what you like about having a FixedPoint type and being able to say
a = b.Multiply(c)
This gives you the flexibility to add modules as you need them by dumping
all the work onto the compiler, which is not a bad place if you are not the
compiler writer.
It does not work in all cases, though; you will probably have a hard time
implementing a FloatingPoint type, for example, unless the new firmware
supported these natively.
There seems to be a rather large gray area surrounding which features are
needed and which features would be nice to have. My opinion is somewhat
split on this topic - if a new byte code is designed now, I know there
is a good chance that design will not change much, severely influencing how
the byte code can and will be used later on; I also know that starting off
with an overly complicated byte code is a mistake, it will never get
finished.
-Kekoa
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) If it is an object oriented language, it isn't the compiler writer it is a library writer. (...) Assuming the language has the flexibility, you could certainly do the FP emulation in the library as well. However, you lose the ability to take (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: FW: Something else is needed, I think...
|
| (...) For Java specificallly, it can't be in the compiler since it would no longer be Java. However, you could easily have a FixedPoint class which implements Number and use that. Since Java doesn't support operator methods you have clunky syntax (...) (26 years ago, 5-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
32 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
