From: Robert Dewar <robert_dewar@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: number bases
Date: 1999/11/01
Date: 1999-11-01T00:00:00+00:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vkjlu$b6d$1@nnrp1.deja.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 381D4C88.B5E8BBE7@interact.net.au
In article <381D4C88.B5E8BBE7@interact.net.au>,
G <Dizzy@interact.net.au> wrote:
> If someone decides to represent all or the majority of
integers in a
> program unit with base 2
> or
> 16
are you talking about Machine_Radix here???
> - does this in any way optimise the code. Which is to say -
does it
> take less space in memory and is it more efficient (does it
run faster)
> to represent integers (floats, whatever) in a form closer to
the machine
> architecture/structure (i.e. binary) ?
This is an implementation and not a language question, obviously
specifying a machine radix of 10 on a non-decimal machines is
likely to degrade performance if the implementation follows
the specification (it is not required to).
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-11-01 0:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-11-01 0:00 number bases G
1999-11-01 0:00 ` Robert Dewar [this message]
1999-11-01 0:00 ` Ted Dennison
1999-11-01 0:00 ` JP Thornley
1999-11-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-11-01 0:00 ` tmoran
1999-11-02 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
1999-11-02 0:00 ` tmoran
1999-11-02 0:00 ` Daryle Walker
1999-11-03 0:00 ` Robert Dewar
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox