RE: Re: Re: Math.sign vs ±0

Ingvar Stepanyan me at rreverser.com
Mon Nov 4 05:58:33 PST 2013


That's strange. I believe I replied to different thread. Sorry.

Sent from my Windows Phone
________________________________
From: Rick Waldron
Sent: 04.11.2013 15:41
To: Ingvar Stepanyan
Cc: es-discuss at mozilla.org
Subject: Re: Re: Re: Math.sign vs ±0

On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 4:10 AM, Ingvar Stepanyan <me at rreverser.com> wrote:

> Why can’t we do Uint64 class inside Math namespace to be used for all the
> 64-bit arithmetic operations?
>
> Like:
>
> var x = Math.Uint64(2);
> var y = Math.Uint64.fromString(“0x12345678abcdef01”);
> var z = x.mul(y); // or Math.Uint64.mul(x, y)
> var z_hi = z.hi; // highest 32-bit part
> var z_lo = z.lo; // lowest 32-bit part
> var z_val = Number(z); // or z.valueOf(), returns IEEE.754-compatible
> float64 number when possible (with highest possible precision, so no loss
> up to +-2^52)
>
> Such syntax looks not so “low-level” for JS devs, should be easily
> polyfilled by current engines and optimized by new ones.
>

Please read and review the value types proposal
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:value_types which will
eventually replace the current contents of value objects
http://wiki.ecmascript.org/doku.php?id=strawman:value_objects

Rick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/es-discuss/attachments/20131104/732be2f3/attachment.html>


More information about the es-discuss mailing list