The Shadow Posted June 9, 2007 Posted June 9, 2007 I believe the 800 digits might be the full amount that can be indexed. The rule was the various calc-engine functions are free to return NaN (not a number, ie "?") if they happen to notice this limit being exceeded, (but they are not required to notice as long as the answer returned is correct instead).
comment Posted June 9, 2007 Posted June 9, 2007 That just might explain the paradox of $j ≠ $j * 1. But I am curious: why do some function place seemingly arbitrary limits on their parameters, e.g. 2^15 for the Date() function?
The Shadow Posted June 9, 2007 Posted June 9, 2007 (edited) I think the idea is that: Date( 1; 2^16; 2007 ) is much more likely to be developer error than a real request. Date's are also limited to years <= 4000 for a similar reason. Admittedly, there is also some "laziness" coming into play here, why spend an extra day writing code to ensure the day and month arguments can go up to 10^400 when 99.999% of all the users would never use this feature anyway, but it would still have to be tested. Edited June 9, 2007 by Guest one more thing...
comment Posted June 9, 2007 Posted June 9, 2007 Thanks. I thought you were going to say it's a limitation of the perpetual calendar algorithm, or something like that. The actual limit is 32,767 (2^15 - 1), and that's not that many days - less than 90 years or, if you like, about 2.25% of the Filemaker date span.
Genx Posted June 10, 2007 Posted June 10, 2007 Hmmmm, All very interesting. Thanks for the great discussion (and yell at alex time guys.
Genx Posted October 8, 2007 Posted October 8, 2007 I thought I might dig this up for no apparent reason.. but looking at the FM 8 tech specs: Number: Support values from 10^-400 up to 10^400 and the negative values of the same range. Index based on the first 400 significant digits. Up to 1 billion characters per field. The first 400 digits are indexed. It would sort of make sense to allow array addressing up to that point as well... but then again maybe not... but a potential way to check and take into account the possibility of truncation is perhaps to address one at 10^400 and one at 10^400-1 then try to retrieve those values. But i forget what other issues we came accross in our discussions so I'm just going to leave it there.
Recommended Posts
This topic is 6257 days old. Please don't post here. Open a new topic instead.
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now