[Skywise]

(12-31-2013, 04:55 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote:

(12-31-2013, 04:09 AM)Skywise Wrote: You may not have explicit types in TB, but TB has to translate things into code the CPU can use, and the CPU *does* have explicit types.

Undoubtedly but TB has no way to use them.

Probably more like TB doesn't let the programmer use them.

(12-31-2013, 04:55 AM)Roger Hunter Wrote:

(12-31-2013, 04:09 AM)Skywise Wrote: But your solution technically isn't the same calculation. You changed one of the input values from 6.2 to 62 and rearranged the formula to compensate.

That's correct. I was computing an array index and floating point will get you into trouble there.

I can't have Array[3.14]?? Bummer.

Quote:Everything in TB is double precision real. I dislike types; it's extra work the PC should do for me. In QL SuperBasic you could say 2+two and get 4

It took me some time to get used to types, but I've been doing it that way for 12+ years now. Now it's even more important in C/C++.

In the end, whatever works. It's like the not quite sarcastic answer when someone asks, "What's the best telescope to buy?" "The one you'll use."

If PERL works for EQF, that's great. You like TB, and maybe FORTRAN? I like(d) XB, and now I'm getting the feel for C++.

BTW, I sent you an email with a sample program a couple days ago. Lemme guess... gmail didn't like the attachment and you didn't see it.

Brian