Anonymous user
Talk:Arbitrary-precision integers (included): Difference between revisions
Talk:Arbitrary-precision integers (included) (view source)
Revision as of 11:43, 13 November 2016
, 7 years ago→Use of external libraries
Line 26:
:Ah well. It seems to me that the point of the task is to demonstrate the ''in-built'' facilities for arbitrary-precision integers, with however allowance for the existence of some library extension so routinely available at every installation that everyone would already be using it for such tasks. If the required number size had not been so large, the IBM1620 would have managed, but perhaps modernists with ibmpc-monocuture aren't interested. Evidently, any language can be extended to present such facilities, but the specification explicitly rejects developing such a library. If in Fortran's case there are three such libraries, and (as it appears from the above) different verbiage is required to employ each for the same calculation, we would find ourselves comparing such libraries rather than the in-built features of different languages. [[User:Dinosaur|Dinosaur]] ([[User talk:Dinosaur|talk]]) 10:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
::True. But then remove also the C and Ada entries, and probably others as well. Oh, wait, the point of this comment was to show that it would be necessary then to add a task to allow external libraries, since many languages don't have builtin multiprecision. It was already stated by Michael Mol in 2010 above. Now, what's most useful? A long talk about the IBM 1620, a computer from 1959 that has nothing to do with modern Fortran, or a way to do multiprecision computations in Fortran today? I am interested in history, but I am definitely interested first in practical way to do things right now: programming is not primarily about history. [[User:Arbautjc|Arbautjc]] ([[User talk:Arbautjc|talk]]) 11:41, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
== Criteria for Non-Draft? ==
| |||