[chuck-users] float and float
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Sun Nov 12 09:05:27 EST 2006
> What is happening is that the implicit cast of an int to a float that
> happens in non-array land isn't happening inside of the array.
Yes, I got that, that's the problem I wanted to report, also see below for
Remember that if you put a number on the left then you are
> initializing the values and if you put the numbers in the bracket
> beside the type you are declaring the size of the array.
Yeah, I think I understood that correctly, maybe it didn't come across from
my examples. I tried to simplify those as much as possible but typed them
from memory since I'm on a borowed computer and didn't think it would be
correct to go install ChucK everywhere. This might've been unclear or even
Actually, I think it's a bit more mysterious then what we argeed on above.
I encountered this bug/feature when dealing with a 3x3 array of floats that
I wanted to asign a set of values too. These values went something like
[ [-1.25, -1, -0.75], [0, 1, 0], [1.25, 1, 0.75]] @=> float foo;
Asignment kept failing, I kept looking and couldn't find the issue.
This isn't improved by ChucK talking about a "@array" or something along
After much frustration I tried asigning the sub-arrarys one by one and
discovered the first went in fine and it was only the second one that caused
a issue. It seems to me that you can asign a array that holds ints to a
array of floats with implicit casting as long as there is at least one float
already in there (notice the integer -1 in the first one, that one seems
fine with ChucK).
I think this should be fine;
[ [-1.25, -1, -0.75], [0, 1.0, 0], [1.25, 1, 0.75]] @=> float foo;
But I think I padded every int in sight with a extra ".0" to be sure.
I hope that clarifies?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users