1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

werty's new number notation ?

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

  1. news

    news Guest

    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
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. 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
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. 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
    (that's bad).
    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
    #3
  4. news

    werty Guest

    ___________________________________


    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
    #4
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.