On Fri, 07 Sep 2007 03:14:33 GMT, wrote:
> On 06 Sep 2007 23:05:39 GMT, "Auric__" <not.my.real@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 21:54:46 GMT, wrote:
>>> On 06 Sep 2007 15:07:41 GMT, "Auric__"
>>> <not.my.real@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>>>>On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 04:43:47 GMT, Arargh wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I should have mentioned that these commands are in the current
>>>>> development version, not the one on my web site. I need to do
>>>>> some more testing before it makes it to the web.
>>>>
>>>>I just downloaded Beta 5 yesterday, and discovered that it's the
>>>>exact same one I downloaded over a year ago.
>>> Yes, I haven't yet updated the web site. The current
>>> development version is Beta 0.6.5.
>>>
>>> If YOU want a copy, send me an email with a valid return
>>> address.
>>
>>auric dot auric at gmail dot com, like it says in the sig. ;)
>
> Yes, I just noticed that at the end of another reply of yours.
> Any size limit to worry about?
I can't explain what happened with the attachment. I haven't sent or
received any since, oh, January of last year.
> It may be a day or two as I have to review the release build
> process, because things have changed since I last ran it.
I'm in no rush.
>>> I would love to get some external testing done. My own test
>>> programs don't seem to fail very often. I wonder why?
>>
>>I make no guarantees. The stuff I'm working on doesn't run on
>>*any* compiler or interpreter at the moment.
> Well, anything that works in PDS that doesn't work in BCET (except
> for what the web site says won't work) is what I want to know
> about.
Okay, once I have it working in QBX I'll tell you what happens. Be a
feww days (at least).
>>>>If I write something that works in Beta 5, is it gonna break in
>>>>the next version?
>>>
>>> Other than counting on something that SHOULDN'T be working, but
>>> does, that is, a bug of some sort, nothing is expected to break.
> BTY, if something does break, I want to know that too.
>
>>> The only thing planned is that sup****t for the 'CURRENCY'
>>> keyword is planned to be dropped, but not sup****t for 64 bit
>>> integers. They will be called 'INT64' or 'INTEGER * 64' or some
>>> such, and will require explicit declaration as the '@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
' suffix
>>> will also be dropped.
>>
>>Int64 would be good, or you could do as FreeBasic does and call it
>>a Longint. Or a Longlong. (That one data type has at least 7
>>different names, depending on what flavor of BASIC you're using.
>>And then there's Liberty Basic, which I am rapidly growing to
>>hate, which ONLY offers 64-bit Ints, but you can't explicitly
>>declare your variables as such.)
> Longlong and Longint have meanings (in basic and other languages)
> that may or may not mean a signed 64-bit integer.
I know. I've already seen "Integer" used to mean 3 different sizes
(again, depending on compiler, and also on what processor you're
targeting). There's even one BASIC (don't remember which, offhand)
where "Long" is 64 bits.
> In any case if you like something else, then:
>
> REM $Define: Longlong = INTEGER * 64
>
> will solve the problem. :-)
I dunno. Int * anything isn't "normal" to me, and probably not most
other BASIC code monkeys.
>>> At some time in the future, I may add proper sup****t for
>>> CURRENCY, that is, with the 10,000 bias, if I get that
>>> energetic.
>
>>I dunno. Why bother?
> Only valid reason that I can think of is for compatibility with
> PDS.
If that's what you want, then [shrug] might as well.
You may want to poke around FreeBasic. That one's mostly QB-
compatible (I think QBX, but I can't recall and don't feel like
checking) but they've done away with "QBX can compile FB apps" for
the most part. It might give you some ideas. (FB *should* be able to
compile QBX apps with few or no changes. No DOS IDE, though.)
>>The only time *I* ever used it in VB was when I
>>needed 64-bit Ints anyway.
> Which you didn't really get. CURRENCY may be stored in a 64-bit
> int, but it always processed by the floating point subroutines.
I know. Bastards.
--
auric dot auric at gmail dot com
*****
You're programmed to be an asshole?
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
