Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic
From: bv (bvoh_at_Xsdynamix.com)
Date: 10/29/04
- Next message: robin: "Re: F2003 and varying strings"
- Previous message: J. F. Cornwall: "Re: [Beginner] advice needed"
- In reply to: John Harper: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Next in thread: James Giles: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Reply: James Giles: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 05:08:27 GMT
John Harper wrote:
>
> Hmmm. Besides dot_product (my original case) there are repeat, matmul,
> max or min of 2 arguments, and lge,lgt,lle,llt.
Now that you mentioned it, I always found it peculiar why the lexical
intrinsics are lacking *leq*. While easy to roll your own, it's probably
the one that'd be the most useful, yet it's *mia*.
- Next message: robin: "Re: F2003 and varying strings"
- Previous message: J. F. Cornwall: "Re: [Beginner] advice needed"
- In reply to: John Harper: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Next in thread: James Giles: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Reply: James Giles: "Re: Defined operation using an intrinsic"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|