Reading a .wav file
in [Fortran]
|
Prev: How to Determine Highest Precision Available on a PC ??
Next: gcc4.4: f951: warning: command line option "-MM" is valid for C/C++/Java/ObjC/ObjC++ but not for Fortran
From: dpb on 11 Aug 2010 18:08 tholen(a)antispam.ham wrote: .... > Too bad there is no native 24-bit integer type in Fortran. ... Which language(s) do? --
From: GaryScott on 11 Aug 2010 18:18 On Aug 11, 5:08 pm, dpb <n...(a)non.net> wrote: > tho...(a)antispam.ham wrote: > > ... > > > Too bad there is no native 24-bit integer type in Fortran. ... > > Which language(s) do? > > -- Harris H-series VOS FORTRAN 77. Probably no modern languages since there are no 24-bit word machines any more.
From: Richard Maine on 11 Aug 2010 18:25 dpb <none(a)non.net> wrote: > tholen(a)antispam.ham wrote: > ... > > > Too bad there is no native 24-bit integer type in Fortran. ... > > Which language(s) do? Well, Fortran can have such a thing. The language standard doesn't require it, but then the standard doesn't require any particular size. The only thing preventing common implementations from doing a 24-bit integer is the developer's evaluation of the cost/benefit tradeoff (benefit having a lot to do with user demand). I'd probably tend to agree with the evident result of that evaluation. -- Richard Maine | Good judgment comes from experience; email: last name at domain . net | experience comes from bad judgment. domain: summertriangle | -- Mark Twain
From: Ron Shepard on 11 Aug 2010 18:52 In article <i3v77j$e65$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, dpb <none(a)non.net> wrote: > > Too bad there is no native 24-bit integer type in Fortran. ... > > Which language(s) do? This depends on the hardware. There certainly was 24-bit integer support in fortran on Harris computers in the 80's, and the reason was because that is what the hardware supported. I hear rumors every once in a while from some vendor or from some compiler writer about implementing arbitrary precision arithmetic into various compilers (integer, not floating point). However, the .wav stuff being discussed here seems to be more suited to bit-string processing. Programmers have always wanted the ability to efficiently manipulate arbitrary length bit strings in fortran (at least since the 70's), but the standards committees over the decades have never agreed on how that should be incorporated. One approach is that they be like character strings, except that the len=N would mean bits rather than characters; scalars could be declared with arbitrary sizes, and arrays could be declared with arbitrary ranks of these scalar variables. The applications for this functionality would include popular things like image processing, audio, and video, but also things like data compression, instrument signals, and telemetry. Considering some of the sophisticated, abstract stuff that did make it through the language committees over the years (not just in fortran, but other languages too), it is sort of surprising that something as "simple" as bit-string processing hasn't made it into any of the popular languages. On the other hand, it took 13 years (f77 to f90) before even bit operators on integers were standardized in fortran, despite the fact that the mil-std document on which that part of the f90 standard was based was published in 1978 immediately after the f77 standard was approved. $.02 -Ron Shepard
From: GaryScott on 11 Aug 2010 19:00
On Aug 11, 5:52 pm, Ron Shepard <ron-shep...(a)NOSPAM.comcast.net> wrote: > In article <i3v77j$e6...(a)news.eternal-september.org>, > > dpb <n...(a)non.net> wrote: > > > Too bad there is no native 24-bit integer type in Fortran. ... > > > Which language(s) do? > > This depends on the hardware. There certainly was 24-bit integer > support in fortran on Harris computers in the 80's, and the reason was > because that is what the hardware supported. > > I hear rumors every once in a while from some vendor or from some > compiler writer about implementing arbitrary precision arithmetic into > various compilers (integer, not floating point). > > However, the .wav stuff being discussed here seems to be more suited to > bit-string processing. Programmers have always wanted the ability to > efficiently manipulate arbitrary length bit strings in fortran (at least > since the 70's), but the standards committees over the decades have > never agreed on how that should be incorporated. One approach is that > they be like character strings, except that the len=N would mean bits > rather than characters; scalars could be declared with arbitrary sizes, > and arrays could be declared with arbitrary ranks of these scalar > variables. The applications for this functionality would include > popular things like image processing, audio, and video, but also things > like data compression, instrument signals, and telemetry. > > Considering some of the sophisticated, abstract stuff that did make it > through the language committees over the years (not just in fortran, but > other languages too), it is sort of surprising that something as > "simple" as bit-string processing hasn't made it into any of the popular > languages. On the other hand, it took 13 years (f77 to f90) before even > bit operators on integers were standardized in fortran, despite the fact > that the mil-std document on which that part of the f90 standard was > based was published in 1978 immediately after the f77 standard was > approved. > > $.02 -Ron Shepard Not only "surprising"...but annoying...dealing with bit strings or arbitrarily defined types (e.g. 11 bit integers) is in 90 percent of the data processing I have to deal with. |