FW: Adobe position paper on the ECMAScript 4 proposal space -- decimal

Dick Sweet sweet at adobe.com
Wed Feb 27 13:18:21 PST 2008


My first attempt to reply bounced from es4-discuss since I wasn't
subscribed.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dick Sweet 
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 1:10 PM
To: 'Brendan Eich'; Peter Hall
Cc: es4-discuss Discuss; TC39; Mike Cowlishaw
Subject: RE: Adobe position paper on the ECMAScript 4 proposal space --
decimal

A couple of comments from the fellow who did the trial implementation of
decimal in Tamarin.

It would be pretty easy to have decimal if you have to explicitly
declare variables of that type and need to explicitly denote literals
that you want to be decimal with the "m" suffix.  Such denotation would
not be necessary for literals without fractional parts, unless they are
beyond the range of integer representation within a double.  Promotion
of arithmetic to decimal in mixed situations isn't that hard to do.

Dick

-----Original Message-----
From: Brendan Eich [mailto:brendan at mozilla.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 10:58 AM
To: Peter Hall
Cc: es4-discuss Discuss; TC39; Mike Cowlishaw
Subject: Re: Adobe position paper on the ECMAScript 4 proposal space --
decimal

On Feb 27, 2008, at 10:40 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:

> First, nothing's "ruled out" -- you're asking the wrong guy if you
> want Adobe's position, but see Lars's reply to Mike Cowlishaw:
> decimal as a type without any implicit literal/operators mode is
> still possible,

I should have written "without generic operator methods" -- ES4 could  
still have a decimal type and built-in operators and literal support,  
but no modal defaulting (no "big red switch").

/be




More information about the Es4-discuss mailing list