Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > Javascript > JavaScript does make errors when dealing just with integers

Reply
Thread Tools

JavaScript does make errors when dealing just with integers

 
 
Stevo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
lorlarz wrote:
> On Aug 19, 2:06 pm, Stevo <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> lorlarz wrote:
>>> Contrary to what one authority in the JavaScript field says:
>>> JavaScript does make errors when dealing with just with integers.
>>> I use .9) ,

>> Funny looking integer.

>
> Will you jokers try to think and read carefully.


I usually stop reading when things start being in capitals - it hurts my
ears when you shout.

To be honest though, I don't really care. I'm not going to create a
voting machine with a scripting language initially designed to tweak web
pages to make them more interesting.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Tim Streater
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
In article
<(E-Mail Removed)>,
lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Aug 19, 2:18*pm, Gregor Kofler <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> > lorlarz meinte:
> >
> > > This a program that uses only integers, yet comes up short in its
> > > addition or count
> > > when used. *HERE IS HOW TO DO THE EXPERIMENT AND SEE:
> > > Without adding on an arbitrary decimal number less than one (I believe
> > > I use .9)

> >
> > You're an idiot. Period. Hit the road!
> >
> > --http://photo.gregorkofler.at::: Landschafts- und
> > Reisefotografiehttp://web.gregorkofler.com*::: meine
> > JS-Spielwiesehttp://www.image2d.com* * * ::: Bildagentur fr den alpinen
> > Raum

>
> No.


Well, your example and its accompanying doc was too complex and boring
for me to want to examine it. You need to reduce its complexity.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Gregor Kofler
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
"lorlarz" the JS deity thusly spoke:

> Yours is a most unacceptable response to my revealing how authorities
> it
> the field of JavaScript ARE WRONG. You should be thanking me, before
> your
> bank account comes up short.


I'm humbled. Next time you'll tell thy disciples how floats and integers
*really* work.

BTW isn't "lorlarz" the name of an orc or perhaps a (yikes!) *troll* in
some Tolkien book? How appropriate.

Gregor



--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur fr den alpinen Raum
 
Reply With Quote
 
Joost Diepenmaat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> On Aug 19, 2:34*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>> > On Aug 19, 2:04*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>
>> >> Just in case it escaped you: 0.9 is NOT an integer, so you are NOT
>> >> working with "just integers". We've done this to death.

>>
>> > .9 IS A NEEDED CORRECTION FACTOR AND NOT IN THE PROGRAM THE WAY IT
>> > **FAILS**.

>>
>> > The .9 is what has to be added to make the pure integer arithmetic
>> > stop making
>> > errors and coming up short. In the experiment, you take it OUT.

>>
>> > Once you remove the .9, all are integers and the math is supposed to
>> > be exact,
>> > and it is not.

>>
>> Well. how about you bloody well show us the code that demonstrates the
>> problem in a concise, well-formatted and clear way. Instead of, you
>> know, rambling on incoherently.
>>
>> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-....html#id306810
>>

>
> Well, its 100% all mine and I take full responsibility. In contrast:
> What team of
> script kiddie monkeys did you work with for your ajax fiasco?


I take it that this means you in fact cannot demonstrate the problem
in any clear fashion.

Thanks for playing.

--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/
 
Reply With Quote
 
lorlarz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
On Aug 19, 2:50*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > On Aug 19, 2:34*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >> lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> >> > On Aug 19, 2:04*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>
> >> >> Just in case it escaped you: 0.9 is NOT an integer, so you are NOT
> >> >> working with "just integers". We've done this to death.

>
> >> > .9 IS A NEEDED CORRECTION FACTOR AND NOT IN THE PROGRAM THE WAY IT
> >> > **FAILS**.

>
> >> > The .9 is what has to be added to make the pure integer arithmetic
> >> > stop making
> >> > errors and coming up short. In the experiment, you take it OUT.

>
> >> > Once you remove the .9, all are integers and the math is supposed to
> >> > be exact,
> >> > and it is not.

>
> >> Well. how about you bloody well show us the code that demonstrates the
> >> problem in a concise, well-formatted and clear way. Instead of, you
> >> know, rambling on incoherently.

>
> >>http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-....html#id306810

>
> > Well, its 100% all mine and I take full responsibility. In contrast:
> > What team of
> > script kiddie monkeys did you work with for your ajax fiasco?

>
> I take it that this means you in fact cannot demonstrate the problem
> in any clear fashion.
>
> Thanks for playing.
>
> --
> Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


Since I laid down the challenge and it was clear and it was not any
more
or less than any scientist would want, I assume this means you bow to
my
expertise and opinion (by the default of being too lazy to conduct a
test).

Until further notice all should assume integer addition in Javascript
my need
a slight rounding up to be exact.

 
Reply With Quote
 
Joost Diepenmaat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Since I laid down the challenge and it was clear and it was not any
> more
> or less than any scientist would want, I assume this means you bow to
> my
> expertise and opinion (by the default of being too lazy to conduct a
> test).


See (again):

http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-....html#id306810

> Until further notice all should assume integer addition in Javascript
> my need
> a slight rounding up to be exact.


That's the stupidest conclusion I've seen you draw all day. You really
should spend less time messing about with the DOM and more time
learning about actual programming.

--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/
 
Reply With Quote
 
lorlarz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
On Aug 19, 3:00*pm, Joost Diepenmaat <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> > Since I laid down the challenge and it was clear and it was not any
> > more
> > or less than any scientist would want, I assume this means you bow to
> > my
> > expertise and opinion (by the default of being too lazy to conduct a
> > test).

>
> See (again):
>
> http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-....html#id306810
>
> > Until further notice all should assume integer addition in Javascript
> > my need
> > a slight rounding up to be exact.

>
> That's the stupidest conclusion I've seen you draw all day. You really
> should spend less time messing about with the DOM and more time
> learning about actual programming.
>
> --
> Joost Diepenmaat | blog:http://joost.zeekat.nl/| work:http://zeekat.nl/


Well, if my "colleagues" are unwilling to replicate a clear
experiment, the cautious
Javasripter (who knows not enough to know otherwise) should believe ME
and that:
Until further notice all should assume integer addition in Javascript
may need a slight rounding up to be exact.

Good conclusion. By the way, Crockford has been informed of his
serious
factual error on the basics. I am sure that must sting. He knows he
has
been held to account here.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Stevo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
lorlarz wrote:
> Since I laid down the challenge and it was clear


Maybe it was clear in your mind, and looking at that mess of code, it's
a messy mind. If that's your attempt at stripping the problem down to a
simple clear example, it falls way short. It shouldn't need lots of
instructions on what to do.

Try googling: javascript math inaccuracy
 
Reply With Quote
 
lorlarz
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
On Aug 19, 2:50*pm, Gregor Kofler <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> "lorlarz" the JS deity thusly spoke:
>
> > Yours is a most unacceptable response to my revealing how authorities
> > it
> > the field of JavaScript ARE WRONG. * You should be thanking me, before
> > your
> > bank account comes up short.

>
> I'm humbled. Next time you'll tell thy disciples how floats and integers
> *really* work.
>
> BTW isn't "lorlarz" the name of an orc or perhaps a (yikes!) *troll* in
> some Tolkien book? How appropriate.
>
> Gregor
>
> --http://photo.gregorkofler.at::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografiehttp://web.gregorkofler.com*::: meine JS-Spielwiesehttp://www.image2d.com* ** ::: Bildagentur fr den alpinen Raum


Hard to really label a person a troll who is talking about a
particular claim
about a particular experiment in computer science (but that seems to
escape
your "sensibilities").
 
Reply With Quote
 
Joost Diepenmaat
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-19-2008
lorlarz <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:

> Hard to really label a person a troll who is talking about a
> particular claim
> about a particular experiment in computer science (but that seems to
> escape
> your "sensibilities").


It's not: you're a troll.

*plonk*

--
Joost Diepenmaat | blog: http://joost.zeekat.nl/ | work: http://zeekat.nl/
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to avoid Out of Memory Errors when dealing with a large XML file? Saqib Ali Perl Misc 2 01-14-2011 09:31 PM
Subprocess module - communicate(data) dealing with errors Paul Moore Python 0 11-21-2006 10:51 PM
When exceptions aren't enough: Dealing with runtime errors. Aaron W. LaFramboise C++ 4 07-25-2005 04:58 AM
Errors, errors, errors Mark Goldin ASP .Net 2 01-17-2004 08:05 PM
Tips for Dealing with "Just Taylor's" SPAM Anonymous Computer Support 1 07-14-2003 03:45 PM



Advertisments