Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!hellgate.utah.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!ucbvax!ETSUACAD.BITNET!S47852EF From: S47852EF@ETSUACAD.BITNET ("Frank C. Earl") Newsgroups: comp.lang.forth Subject: Re: division donuts Message-ID: <9103011824.AA19127@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> Date: 28 Feb 91 21:41:10 GMT References: Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU Reply-To: "Frank C. Earl" Organization: The Internet Lines: 27 On Thu, 28 Feb 91 14:53:43 EST Jan Stout said: >Sorry Frank, but in my opinion you're misinterpreting the meaning of the >modulo result. My schoolbook tells me the definition of division is such >that > x r > - = q + - > y y > >because x = q * y + r , in your case -4 = 1 * -3 + -1, which is perfectly >valid. Note that in the above equation the last term r / y is dependant >on y, so it becomes quite questionable wether your step to remove the >minus signs is justifiable... > >Jan Stout, wsbusup@eutws1.win.tue.nl Ok, I see some of what you are saying, but it seems strange to operate that way (Why? because you don't know whether or not the divisor is negative or not... you don't know- and therefore, looking at the output, you could get confused.. [My instance, I suppose] Besides, ADA doesn't do it that way- because of symmetry with the 1st quadrant (Why I suggested it in the first place).) In any case, it got people OFF of the subject of FIG bungling/doing ok!! :) Thanks, Frank