MOD function does not work! So be warned!

[Dar Scott]

On Sunday, April 7, 2002, at 07:24 AM, Michael D Mays wrote:

> Actually the answer to my question is that there is no such thing as an
> integer in xTalk. Any string which could be a number which seems 
> to act like
> an integer is a binary real which has an exact decimal 
> representation during
> computation. You can't define a range for an integer if your 
> language does
> not have the concept of type.

If an implementation did use an integer type for a particular range 
and then switched to floating point outside that range, how would 
we ever know?

> What I was trying to say is that an integer to a lot of people is 
> a whole
> number in the range of +/- infinity. If they add zero to a large 
> integer and
> the result is another large integer they are upset. Just like 
> those people
> who summed ten tenths and didn't get one.

Yes!  Most of us learn what an integer is early in mathematics 
education.  The computer language concept of integer type is 
related, but is not the same; it is computer jargon.

> This isn't a large problem in the since that most xTalk 
> programmers aren't
> going to be writing programs where they will encounter these 
> situations.

I have to defer to your judgment on this.  I wonder though, whether 
this is the case because those who tried went on to other 
applications or other environments after becoming frustrated.

I can imagine, though, a little stack to keep up with expense 
reports that reports after a couple months that reimbursements do 
not equal out-of-pocket expenses.

> The large problem I see is if an xTalk were ones first language 
> one would be
> ignorant of computer numerics.

This is why I would prefer to see limitations described in terms of 
numerals.

Or, if that cannot be done, then a safe zone and behavior within it 
described in simple terms using numerals (referring to number of 
digits and so on).  Anything outside that safe zone is for advanced 
users and can be described in technical jargon.

(What I would really prefer is numbers virtually based completely 
on numerals.)

As typical in any field, those of us who have paid the price to 
learn trade knowledge think it is easy and the right place to build 
concepts.  Moreover, sometimes we tend to think of those things as 
the "right" way to think about the world.  Or rights of passage 
into the priesthood.  Or, "you can't stay innocent forever, you 
will have to learn about the real world eventually."  Or, "when you 
get really good, you can graduate to C."

A script writer should be able to concentrate on a particular 
problem domain using commonly held knowledge.  At times that 
problem domain does involve computer numerics as in writing scripts 
to input or output data that involves those.  Those concepts belong 
only in those commands and functions and options that involve those.

Dar Scott