Re: Options for signed 64bit ints

[Justin Cormack <justin@...>]

On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Andrew Starks <andrew.starks@trms.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Thursday, August 1, 2013, Lorenzo Donati wrote:
>>
>> On 01/08/2013 9.32, Chodera, Ian wrote:
>>>
>>> nano = 10^-9
>>>
>>> see: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/prefixes.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> I think the OP meant he has to work in the nanoseconds *range*,
>> using basic time units of 100ns:
>>
>> 10^7 "units" == 1s
>> => 1 unit = 10^-7s = 100 * 10^-9s = 100ns
>>
>> -- Lorenzo
>>
>> --
>> ()  ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
>> /\  www.asciiribbon.org   - against proprietary attachments
>>
>
> This is correct.
>
> I'm on 5.2 and limiting dependancies is important.  I'd also prefer an
> approach that avoided patching code in individual Lua files. Libraries, even
> ones replacing core functionality, are okay, provided they're stable.
>
> Is grafting portions of LuaJIT possible, given the above preferences?

No but luaffi, linked above has a compatible interface, and you really
don't need much of it (have been meaning to rip out its type handling
parts but havent had time).


> I'm still temped by 5.3 work 1...

Sounds a reasonable option...

One more option to look at is if long doubles work for you - depends
on your compiler though. This would migrate to 5.3 fairly smoothly
(you could test on both).

Justin