Why do you expect hex to be treated differently from decimal

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #171,921 by Arkadiy 8/31/04 11:31:50 AM 8/31/04 11:32:44 AM Reply	Why do you expect hex to be treated differently from decimal ? When you see a decimal constant 4294967294, do you expect it to mean -2? -- "...was poorly, lugubrious and intoxicated." -- Patrick O'Brian, "Master and Commander" Edited by Arkadiy Aug. 31, 2004, 11:32:44 AM EDT Expand All History
Post #171,926 by deSitter 8/31/04 11:42:16 AM Reply	Re: Why do you expect hex to be treated differently In FORTH this issue never arises. An integer is what it is in relation to base 2 and the number of available bits in it. Signed vs. unsigned is a stupid, needless complication. So: TRUE is 111111...1 and FALSE is 000000...0. There is only one TRUE and one FALSE and NOT TRUE is FALSE. Something like 1101001..1 has no logical value. The programmatic representation is immaterial. -drl
Post #171,953 by jb4 8/31/04 12:37:46 PM Reply	Man, that's a good question! I suppose because I can specify a bit pattern directly, and I expected that bit pattern to be interpreted by the underlying hardware directly. But I must say, I now see your point, and it is a good one. Thanx! jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #172,013 by a6l6e6x 8/31/04 4:42:17 PM Reply	Now that's clarity! Alex "If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -- Philip K. Dick, US science fiction writer
Post #172,017 by deSitter 8/31/04 5:00:03 PM Reply	Nope, it's bad math A 32 bit integer has 4...mumble possible values. If you really want integers and not whole numbers, then implicitly these are signed, which requires a bit. So there are 2...mumble positive values, 2...mumble-1 negative values, and zero. If you want 4...mumble integers you need more bits. -drl
Post #172,022 by a6l6e6x 8/31/04 5:19:13 PM Reply	But, counters of real things don't need negative values. Alex "If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -- Philip K. Dick, US science fiction writer
Post #172,023 by ben_tilly 8/31/04 5:20:08 PM Reply	I'd like to add a negative number of votes for Bush. ;-) To deny the indirect purchaser, who in this case is the ultimate purchaser, the right to seek relief from unlawful conduct, would essentially remove the word consumer from the Consumer Protection Act - [link\|http://www.techworld.com/opsys/news/index.cfm?NewsID=1246&Page=1&pagePos=20\|Nebraska Supreme Court]
Post #172,025 by a6l6e6x 8/31/04 5:23:34 PM Reply	That only works on Diebold machines. :) Alex "If you can control the meaning of words, you can control the people who must use the words." -- Philip K. Dick, US science fiction writer
Post #172,024 by deSitter 8/31/04 5:21:51 PM Reply	Certainly But then, Ark's comment loses its pithiness (\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd\ufffd) -drl
Post #172,046 by Arkadiy 8/31/04 6:59:29 PM Reply	"Expressive", not "pithy" :) "pithy" I guess would be better translated as poisonous, ядовитый - it's an idiomatic usage. -- "...was poorly, lugubrious and intoxicated." -- Patrick O'Brian, "Master and Commander"
Post #172,047 by deSitter 8/31/04 7:03:32 PM Reply	Re: "Expressive", not "pithy" :) Why can I see your Cyrillic but not mine? Some encoding mojo? -drl
Post #172,172 by Arkadiy 9/1/04 9:33:56 AM Reply	Dunno. I see yours fine in Mozilla on Win 2000 after I select the proper code page - Cyrillic Windows-1251 -- "...was poorly, lugubrious and intoxicated." -- Patrick O'Brian, "Master and Commander"

What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (jb4) - (52) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:07:59 PM EDT

What is typeof(0x80000000)? - (ChrisR) - (7) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:25:16 PM EDT

right, add an L -NT - (deSitter) - (6) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:30:08 PM EDT

Ain't that a UL - (ChrisR) - (5) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:34:49 PM EDT

This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler." - (static) - (1) - Aug. 26, 2004, 09:11:16 PM EDT

Re: This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler. - (jb4) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:35:47 AM EDT

Actually, that would be a U (or u) - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:43:22 AM EDT

What about casting the values? - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:34:46 AM EDT

Yes, that was the solution I used - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:55:24 AM EDT

Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (lordbeatnik) - (3) - Aug. 26, 2004, 11:05:40 PM EDT

I guess... - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:39:19 AM EDT

If there was no ambiguity... - (lordbeatnik) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 06:51:20 PM EDT

For the next set of standards? - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:20 PM EDT

Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (Arkadiy) - (36) - Aug. 27, 2004, 11:32:17 AM EDT

Re: Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (jb4) - (35) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:15:45 PM EDT

Setting the high bit is processor dependent. - (hnick) - (34) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:27:28 PM EDT

OK, then the standard should be saying - (Arkadiy) - (33) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:53:36 PM EDT

No I actually write code based on them - (jb4) - (30) - Aug. 27, 2004, 02:27:25 PM EDT

Ignore them and use my common sence -NT - (Arkadiy) - (29) - Aug. 27, 2004, 03:24:32 PM EDT

I'll bet debugging your code is a real joy... - (jb4) - (28) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:56 PM EDT

Nope - (Arkadiy) - (27) - Aug. 31, 2004, 10:04:06 AM EDT

And so tell me, O Oracle of Common Sence [sic] - (jb4) - (26) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:04:10 AM EDT

offensive foul, ball to Ark - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:45 AM EDT

Rest assured, - (Arkadiy) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:17:52 AM EDT

:) ok -NT - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:55 AM EDT

OK, OK... - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:59 AM EDT

Well, while the tone is disagreable, the question is - (Arkadiy) - (21) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:14:05 AM EDT

Point missed. - (jb4) - (20) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:35 AM EDT

If C were sane, TRUE = -1 and problem vanishes -NT - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:40 AM EDT

Ermm...say What? - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:28:42 AM EDT

Re: Ermm...say What? - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:37:26 AM EDT

Much like Jewish law - (Arkadiy) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:43:34 AM EDT

So you prefer how VB does it?? -NT - (ben_tilly) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:01:31 PM EDT

Point: Ben... -NT - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:04:18 PM EDT

How it used to do it. - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:47:19 PM EDT

Hehee! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 03:18:32 PM EDT

Why do you expect hex to be treated differently from decimal - (Arkadiy) - (11) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:32:44 AM EDT

Re: Why do you expect hex to be treated differently - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:42:16 AM EDT

Man, that's a good question! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 12:37:46 PM EDT

Now that's clarity! -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (8) - Aug. 31, 2004, 04:42:17 PM EDT

Nope, it's bad math - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:00:03 PM EDT

But, counters of real things don't need negative values. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (6) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:19:13 PM EDT

I'd like to add a negative number of votes for Bush. ;-) -NT - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:20:08 PM EDT

That only works on Diebold machines. :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:23:34 PM EDT

Certainly - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:21:51 PM EDT

"Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (Arkadiy) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 06:59:29 PM EDT

Re: "Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 07:03:32 PM EDT

Dunno. - (Arkadiy) - Sept. 1, 2004, 09:33:56 AM EDT

Wasn't trying to piss you off... - (hnick) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 04:06:40 PM EDT

Interesting assumption: - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:51:55 PM EDT

Hmm...while the datatype will be first reached, - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 05:35:03 PM EDT

True, but... - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:55:52 PM EDT

Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (gdaustin) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:58 PM EDT

iwethey.org

Grrrr, watch me beat my chest.
132 ms