Re: 62/62 - no macgic integer converter number - just a mixing of classes!
Re: 62/62 - no macgic integer converter number - just a mixing of classes!
- Subject: Re: 62/62 - no macgic integer converter number - just a mixing of classes!
- From: John W Baxter <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 17:58:33 -0800
At 0:49 +0100 2/23/01, ThK wrote:
>
On 22.02.2001 at 14:51 Uhr, email@hidden wrote:
>
>
>--__--__--
>
>
>
>Message: 9
>
>Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 22:27:25 -0800
>
>Subject: Re: magic integer converter number 62? - Joking???
>
>From: Paul Berkowitz <email@hidden>
>
>To: Applescript-Users <email@hidden>
>
>
>
>On 2/21/01 10:15 PM, I wrote:
>
>
>
>> So it seems to have to do with powers of 2 plus factors of 0.3 subtracting
>
>> the factor of 0.3. Nothing to do with x a such.
>
>>
>
>> ((n * 2^5) + (n * 0.3)) - (n * 0.3)
>
>> --> Can't make (n * 2^5).0 into an integer
>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>That's not quite right:
>
>
>
>(2^n * 2^4) + (n * 0.3)) - (n * 0.3) -- n an integer > 0
>
>--> Can't make (2^n * 2^4).0 into an integer
>
>
>
>Even stranger. it has to be an exponent of 2
>
>
>...etc.
>
>
You all are still talking handling "reals" as "integers". It's a different
>
kind of class! Your result is always REAL not INTEGER.
>
>
Take care of classes, please! It's not a question of math.
>
No, the discussion was about converting a real result which,
mathematically, would be an integer from the class real to the class
integer. Unfortunately, computationally the input to "as integer" was not
exactly 2, and therefore I was expecting "as integer" to fail. My problem
here has been, right along, that the "as integer" wasn't failing when it
"should."
Chris Nebel cleared that up very well today.
--John
--
John Baxter email@hidden Port Ludlow, WA, USA