Re: bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?)
[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Date Index]
[
Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?)
- From: Philippe Lhoste <PhiLho@...>
- Date: 2005年9月05日 15:33:31 +0200
Lisa Parratt wrote:
On 4 Sep 2005, at 15:53, Asko Kauppi wrote:
local function wputd( n )
wputb( n(MASK_000000FF) )
wputb( n(MASK_0000FF00) )
wputb( n(MASK_00FF0000) )
wputb( n(MASK_FF000000) )
end
Call is overriden to provide the binary and (scaled to bit 0) of the
value itself, and the mask. I consider this easy to read.
This is great functionality, but I'd still want access to the raw
boolean operators. Without them, there's no sensible way of doing
boolean algebra, which can be a great boon for optimising certain
algorithms. They're also pretty much mandatory for things like
encryption functions.
MD5, CRC, just to keep in simple (?), widely used algorithms.
Random number generators, hashes, storage of large number of booleans, etc.
--
Philippe Lhoste
-- (near) Paris -- France
-- http://Phi.Lho.free.fr
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
- References:
- what's wrong?, Stukov
- Re: what's wrong?, Mike Pall
- Re: what's wrong?, Lisa Parratt
- Re: what's wrong?, Luiz Henrique de Figueiredo
- Re: what's wrong?, Philippe Lhoste
- Re: what's wrong?, Mike Pall
- bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?), Asko Kauppi
- Re: bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?), Mike Pall
- Re: bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?), Asko Kauppi
- Re: bitwise ops -- make them enums! (Re: what's wrong?), Lisa Parratt