in reply to Re^3: Math::Base - arithmetics with baseX integers (OP updated)
in thread Math::Base - arithmetics with baseX integers (updated)
...but... why? Why would you want two's complement behavior in other bases?
I think that you are both over- and under-thinking this. (We've clashed before on the benefits or otherwise of 'machine representation', so you may chose to simply ignore this.)
On computers (popular, common, generic), numbers are stored and manipulated internally as binary. Whether we choose to view those numbers as signed or unsigned, integers or floats, decimal or hexadecimal or octal or (indeed) binary; internally they are held and maintained in binary form.
Even your favored (Python) infinite precision numbers are stored and manipulated using a binary representation. And that means that it had to deal with exactly the same problems as shmem's code, and solved them in essentially the same way as you are now critiquing.
For the full skinny, read PEP-0237.
|
|---|
| Replies are listed 'Best First'. | |
|---|---|
|
Re^5: Math::Base - arithmetics with baseX integers (OP updated)
by no_slogan (Deacon) on Aug 24, 2017 at 03:01 UTC | |
by BrowserUk (Patriarch) on Aug 24, 2017 at 12:35 UTC | |
by no_slogan (Deacon) on Aug 24, 2017 at 14:21 UTC |