On 2012-11-14 12:21 PM, "Petri Häkkinen" <petrih3@gmail.com> wrote:
On 14.11.2012, at 8.54, Petri Häkkinen wrote:
This definition screams for the symbol `/%`.
q, r = 42 /% 10 --> 4,2
Dirk
Indeed. But /% looks like some sort of escape sequence, I would perhaps
go with %%.
Oh, I think I got Dirk's idea the wrong way. I thought you were
suggesting /% to be the modulo operator.
What I meant was: I would prefer separate operators // and %% (integer
division and modulo) over /%. The reason: there are no combined operators
+-, */, <> etc. either…. you get the idea ;-)
On 14.11.2012, at 15.37, Roberto Ierusalimschy wrote:
May I ask what is the opinion of Roberto regarding these new operators?
I think we always stated that the main problem with bitwise operators
in Lua was that they do not have a "natural" interpretation over Lua
numbers. If Lua gets integers, this problem is gone.
That's what I thought. Thanks!
Petri
It's maybe worth noting though that a lot of FPUs can give both x / y and x
% y in a single instruction. Having Lua mirror this by having two values
returned from % seems like it'd make possible optimization easier.
But I wonder if there's existing code that might break, such as f(x % y)
now passing an extra argument?
