# werty's new number notation ?

Discussion in 'Embedded' started by news, Apr 6, 2007.

1. ### newsGuest

Conventionly we have the 10 'ascii' digits possibly mapped into a [I think]
5 * 7 'image matrix' - the '0 to 9' character renderings.

For machine code programming of a 16 bit CPU, it is much more intuitive
to have the number, hex in this case, mapped to a 4 * 4 'image'.

So. eg. 13=hex0D would be rendered in it's 4 * 4 'image' as:
[13=8+5=8+4+1=##0# : pixel on/off = #/0]
0000
0000
0000
##0#
And the following char, which looks a bit like a "Z"
#### > 256 * 16
00#0 > 256
0#00 > 16
#### > 1
represents the number: (8+4+2+1)*256*16+2*256+4*16+15 = ?
Wow ! I don't find my calculator !
= hexF24F

I've chosen to give the MSbit first [top-posters are screwed here!].

So if the "Z" looking image represents the number %F24F, then
perhaps 'ADD %F24F ...' could be displayed as "+Z..." ?
And you could see the individual bits change the "Z", another image.

IMO the concepts which werty is selling are similar to the
abacus, which more DIRECTLY represents eg. "7 - 5 = 2",
than 'our way of going via the 'symbols': "7", "5", "2", "-","=".

werty correctly realises that skipping the extra stage of
translating concepts to text has great advantages, when
communicating with a CPU-systems.

Of course we still need the text, in our case ascii, to
communicate with humans - because of convention.

== Chris Glur.

news, Apr 6, 2007

2. ### Wilco DijkstraGuest

That's a great idea indeed, but let me enhance it a little. How
about 8x8 images with 8-bit of color information per pixel, allowing
for many more images. In fact the total number of unique images
is 2^2048, that's more than enough to associate each atom in the
universe with an image and still have enough room for any parallel
universes we haven't discovered yet!

And why not give everybody on our planet a unique image, dispensing
with passports, social security numbers, barcodes etc! Basically we
replace everything with an image! Programming would be a breeze as
each image encodes up to 64 instructions! This means you can't make
any mistakes any more - you instantly notice there is something
wrong in an image!

But let me try out something really far out futuristic... How about
associating some of the useless images with the sounds that we
can make with our throats? Perhaps use images that can be easily
written with a few twists of your wrist. That way we can see an image,
immediately know what sound it represents, and quickly write it all in
one go! I call this new concept an "alphabet". It's just a dream, but I
know I can patent it (in the US anyway). Imagine the possibilities...

Wilco (in qwerty mode)

Wilco Dijkstra, Apr 6, 2007

3. ### Alex McDonaldGuest

This mode of communication must be catching, because your werty-
inspired idea is simply an unusable extension to Braille. Both you and
werty suffer from unfettered imaginations (that's good) untempered by
even a little research and contemplation before hitting the keyboard
Of course you're right there; so, if I'm actually communicating with a
human, read this the conventional way.

*plonk*

Alex McDonald, Apr 6, 2007
4. ### wertyGuest

___________________________________

Which humans do i NEED to communicate

with , Chris ?

Do i need to explain to my critics , why

my stuff works , in their Luddite terms

and C buzz words .

I only need to imagine , then do ..

And hope some here will find the

results as a step to faster programmming ,

If i succeed , people will start using the
new software method , and make fools
of the bloat C/C++ users ..

One can learn nothing from dis-assembling
others code/applications .

After all , they did not write elegant code
to impress the world , but bloat code to
get a job with MicroSoft .

Nothing perverts as programming do .

If you attack all complexity and write
your own computer language that has
no "asides" , you will be the
2nd Chuck Moore and one person will
"beat a path to your door " , and then
copy it for 15 million others ,

and your name will be forgotten in
one week ..

I can do that ...

----------------------------------

ARM . Building a tiny , CMOS State
machine , it looks like Forth , has
3 SRAM's , so it has 3 levels !
Assembler is in the first level .
Theses are slow old SRAM .
4 KB , 32KB , 4 KB .

Thats equal to 3 megabytes .

werty, Apr 9, 2007