World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4146x2] | well, look - we've got BCD for the money, right? so there is the solution for those who need it. But i would vote for another kind of expressing units, more general. IMO money! is the most useless datatype in REBOL. My proposition really is 123'456.123[unit], where 'unit would be of no meaning to not complicate things - simply 123[USD] + 123[EUR] would be 246[USD] - the first occurance of the unit. |
I can even imagine unit conversion table, so that we could get even USD + EUR result .... and if expression would contain some non transferrable units, e.g. USD + kg, then error would be raised ... | |
Geomol 19-Aug-2007 [4148] | Write that down somewhere (other than only here). When the DocBase go public, there could be a place there for new ideas and suggestions. |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4149x6] | [...] can't be done |
kg$123 is not that bad - other languages have much weirder syntax. | |
maybe, we can do 123#kg but i don't see a big improvement here. | |
kg#123 may be possible too. | |
or 123$kg | |
rebol has very few "special" characters. so you'd have to pick between # $ %. | |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4155] | or we just could state, that $ is simply a unit char. And rename datatype from money! to unit! :-) |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4156x6] | % is already used by percent! is is out of the question. |
R2: | |
>> kg$100 == KG$100.00 | |
so, yes, it's already that wa. | |
way. | |
maybe 123kg can be made to work, but, i don't know if it would create problems. | |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4162] | that could mean some deeper changes to parser probably, no? Well, that is not much of an issue .... |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4163x4] | >> 123kg ** Syntax Error: Invalid integer -- 123kg ** Near: (line 1) 123kg |
syntax error means that we have a free spot in the parser there :-) | |
but, we should be careful with something like that, as it can get very confusing. | |
kg123 is a word for example. | |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4167] | we already use # in many datatypes, no? hex, binary, special notation of #[none], some possible binary conversion functions were suggested as 16#{} etc. |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4168] | yes, as i said, i think only # $ and % are "special" for the parser, so that you have to pick there. carl picked # for a lot of things because $ and % carry meaning. |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4169] | kg#123 and kg$123 sound equal to me. It is just that the datatype is called money! Dunno if english unit! term would be more descriptive/general ... |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4170x2] | #123 is an issue so kg#123 would mean that you always have to specify a unit... and a space by mistake becomes a subtle bug. |
ok, so you basically just want to rename money! to unit! or something like that. | |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4172] | yes, if BCD in general would be usefull for other things than money and bank apps meaning, then it could be the right time to do so. I was inspired by dictionary! to map! rename, so it seems the team is open to ideas in that regard.... |
Gabriele 19-Aug-2007 [4173] | yes, but dictionary does not break compatibility, money! would (view scripts don't run in r3 but core scripts may run quite well) |
Pekr 19-Aug-2007 [4174x2] | I don't agree to that argument though. Even core will change, protocols, schemes are different, and btw - what about missing hash? I remember using hash, but I never used money! IMO money! is the least used datatype in REBOL :-) |
but the issue is not really that big, so I can live with money!, although it will be kind of weird, if I will use it for weight or other unit, when the need of BCD would arise ..... well, maybe I will not even need BCD, so .... :-) | |
btiffin 19-Aug-2007 [4176] | Petr; I use money! all the time with the contruction accounting scripts. Bosses love it, until I have to pummel them for using commas in big money! and with construction projects it doesn't take long to get to a monkey. |
PeterWood 19-Aug-2007 [4177x2] | Gabriele: Why not leave money! just as it is for compatibility for the people who want to use it and introduce a Fixed! type. (I didn't call it BCD because apparently it isn't). The following behaviour (modelled on IBM 360) would be ideal: >>fixed-dec: 1.98F2 == 1.98 >>type? fixed-dec == fixed! >>print fixed-dec == 1.98 >> probe fixed-dec == 1.98F2 >>2F2 / 3F2 == 0.66 >>2F2 / 3F2 + 0.005F3 == 0.67 |
To keep Brian's construction bosses happy you could allow the use of thousand separators eg >>fixed-dec: 1,000F2 == 1,000.00 | |
Gabriele 20-Aug-2007 [4179x2] | changing how money is implemented does not break compatibility. |
also, it's not bcd, but it's not fixed point either. it is 26 decimal digits floating point. | |
Pekr 20-Aug-2007 [4181x2] | why "standard" BCD aproach was not adopted? Is it binary represented or not? I mean - can we be sure that some weird rounding will not happen, and that the number stays allways the same? |
I second fixed! datatype name .... or I propose unit! | |
Gregg 20-Aug-2007 [4183] | I'm sure there will be notes about why standard BCD was not used. |
amacleod 20-Aug-2007 [4184] | vv.v,xc ,gbbokgtokio98tttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt8oolllllllllllllllk |
Kaj 20-Aug-2007 [4185] | Hi Junior! :-) |
Pekr 20-Aug-2007 [4186] | :-) |
Henrik 20-Aug-2007 [4187] | I see another rebol coder coming up |
Kaj 20-Aug-2007 [4188] | Could be a cat in the bag... |
Pekr 20-Aug-2007 [4189] | so we'll finally get regular expressions engine in R3 :-) |
Gabriele 20-Aug-2007 [4190x2] | petr: because this the current money! format is faster and takes less space (you can't pack 26 bcd digits in a rebol value otherwise) |
it's still decimal (not binary) so no rounding problems when converting from string to internal representation. | |
Pekr 21-Aug-2007 [4192x4] | When will we be able to comment on new VID? I have found out link to docs. But I also don't want to open some discussion here, when other ppl might not be informed. The trouble is, that just because we are not let in in the early state of development, we might miss the influence on what the new VID will all be about .... |
And I fear one things - it will all be cooked behind the scenes, and we will be presented with result. So far we were told to trust what the group comes up with, but I really wonder, what that group of 20 or so testers is doing, if docs contain things like using "-" char for "no value to change" meaning, instead of none :-) | |
I read every VID related doc more than 5 times, and I am only slowly starting to get the idea behind it :-) So I wonder - is new VID conceptually so complicated, or there is still not enough docs to get the idea? :-) There are already things I like a lot, but there are also some worries, although those migh show as minor. Maybe some better explanation (more docs) will help the situation ... | |
So far the most precise docs in View area are Cyphre's draw docs. Well, those are mostly a reference. I also like make-gobs doc. | |
older newer | first last |