r3wp [groups: 83 posts: 189283]
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

World: r3wp

[!REBOL3-OLD1]

Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[409x3]
sure, my HP48 can do that easily
as long there is some definable way to convert between them or make 
some sense from it
the acceleration of gravity would be 9.82 [m/s/s] so units themselves 
are math expressions
PeterWood
11-Apr-2006
[412]
It that something for a dialect rather then to be inlcuded in the 
core langauge?
Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[413]
peterwood, quite possibly
Graham
11-Apr-2006
[414x2]
we already have money datatypes
why not ones for mensuration
Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[416]
I think it's worth making a concept dialect for scientific math with 
units
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[417]
Hmm, funny idea. To add 6 meters and 2 UK foot:
SIm6 + UKfoot2
Looks weird. :-)
Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[418]
actually, it would be good to make a ctx-unit to handle units exactly 
like the hp48 does
Graham
11-Apr-2006
[419]
I often have to calculate BMIs .. and most people know their height 
in feet and inches, but their weight in kgs :(
Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[420x3]
the hp48 uses an underscore to attach the number to a unit: 6_m / 
23_cm
http://www.apple.com/downloads/macosx/math_science/eurekalc.html
<-- I think that could be done with a dialect...
so many things to do!
Graham
11-Apr-2006
[423]
that calculator needs a spell checker as well!
Henrik
11-Apr-2006
[424]
well, kintetic energy is that new thing, you know...
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[425]
Graham, I've made a RAMBO proposal for vector and matrix.
Graham
11-Apr-2006
[426x2]
how do you find the 4th part of a 4D vector?
ie. what comes after /z ?
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[428x2]
4? :)
x, y and z can be possible, like we have first, second ...
To reach the next dimensions, integers are needed.
v: 1.0x2.0x3.0x4.0x5.0
v/x
1.0
v/5
5.0
PeterWood
11-Apr-2006
[430]
A quick google took me to the Python page - "The 4th component can 
be accessed either by the name w or t." 

http://cgkit.sourceforge.net/doc2/vec4.html
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[431]
First, second, ... go up to tenth. We don't have eleventh. You need 
to do serie/11 to get the 11'th element.
PeterWood
11-Apr-2006
[432]
It would seem w is the popular choice - www.mathpages.com/home/kmath482.htm
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[433]
Peter, ok idea, and I'm all for that. There just shouldn't be a limit, 
and we have to use integers to reach later parts of a vector ... 
like with series.
Graham
11-Apr-2006
[434x2]
Good to know that is solved.
don't know why we just don't start with "a" and work our way thru 
to "z"
PeterWood
11-Apr-2006
[436]
There also seems to be a convention of x y z t u v
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[437x2]
We run out of characters giving meaning, if we have for example an 
8-dimensional vector. But it should be possible to make an 8-dimensional 
vector.
t, u and v is probably found a lot in 3D graphics math.
PeterWood
11-Apr-2006
[439]
I'm sure that there is a mathematical convention and would be surprised 
if Carl S doesn't know it.
Geomol
11-Apr-2006
[440x11]
t for translation. u and v is used as uv-mapping of textures.
I don't even think, it'll take up much code to implement these things. 
The theory is there, and it's well-defined, how you calculate with 
vectors and matrices.
All different kinds of 3D manipulation will look simple, like scaling, 
rotation, reflection, etc. All those are well-defined matrix-operations. 
And supporting multi-dimensional vectors and matrices might pull 
a lot of science people to REBOL.
We need some different symbols for multiplication. dot-product, cross-product.
M: make matrix! 4x4
T: make matrix! 4x4
maybe: M x T
:-)
but x might be a word.
maybe
M * T for cross-product, and
M . T for dot-product?
Would it be strange to have dots flying around in the code, all by 
themselves?
Reaching second element on second row in a 2-dimensional matrix:
M/2x2
And of course we should have matrices with more than 2 dimensions, 
so something like this is possible:
M/2x2x2

So pairs need to be extended somehow into a datatype, which is like 
a vector, but with integers instead of decimals.
/joke-mode-on
Sorry guys, REBOL 3.0 is delayed another year! ;-)
/joke-mode-off
Karol
11-Apr-2006
[451]
Hi! Why use pairs for idexing thats what paths are for. What is wrong 
with M/2/2/2   ?
Pekr
11-Apr-2006
[452x2]
we should stay with path imo ...
although we got overvoted for rebcode, which uses dot ;-)
Karol
11-Apr-2006
[454]
since pairs are only integers not decimals vector and matrix could 
be replacement for draw dialect coordinates, AGG has subpixel accuracy
Rebolek
11-Apr-2006
[455]
Karol: You can do 2x2 with pair! but not 2/2 with path!
Karol
11-Apr-2006
[456]
like this: a: [ [ 0 1] [ 2.2 3.1]]  a/2/1
Rebolek
11-Apr-2006
[457]
Geomol: "So pairs need to be extended somehow into a datatype, which 
is like a vector, but with integers instead of decimals." --- decimal! 
is better in my opinion. It's consistent with current behaviour whre 
you can do 
>> block/4.5
and decimal part is truncated.
Karol
11-Apr-2006
[458]
but with matrix we can     a: make matrix! [ [ 0 1] [ 2.2 3.1]]  
a/2/1