DWUTKA at marlow.com
DWUTKA at marlow.com
Wed May 18 14:09:29 CDT 2005
Again...look at your test code JC. Drew -----Original Message----- From: John W. Colby [mailto:jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:54 PM To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' Subject: RE: Integers was:RE: [AccessD] Global Variable No you haven't been led astray. Our young Jedi Knight is speaking of things which he knows not. ;-) John W. Colby www.ColbyConsulting.com Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause: http://folding.stanford.edu/ -----Original Message----- From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com [mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of Francisco Tapia Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 1:49 PM To: Access Developers discussion and problem solving Subject: Re: Integers was:RE: [AccessD] Global Variable I was always under the impression that a 16bit integer was processed in a single clock cycle just like the 32bit long integer. Additionally a 16bit integer always took up less memory. Have I been led astray from all the various tech magazines and discussion lists around the net? On 5/18/05, DWUTKA at marlow.com <DWUTKA at marlow.com> wrote: > > Now does that make sense? Where is the value in using a slower > variable > (Integer) to represent, let's say a month. Sure, the value is going to be > 1 > through 12, unless the calendar itself changes. If you use a Long Integer, > for the same value, can it not store 1 through 12 also? Running faster? > It's not a different language, so you can't compare going to assembler, > from > VB, besides, unless I'm mistaken, math in VB is going to be just as fast > as > something in assembler.... > > Drew > > -----Original Message----- > From: Hale, Jim [mailto:Jim.Hale at fleetpride.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 12:08 PM > To: 'Access Developers discussion and problem solving' > Subject: RE: [AccessD] Global Variable > > Okay Drew, you've completely confused me (which often is not all that > hard to do). I thought it was always a "good" practice to type > variables according to use. I use integers for things like months, > loop counters (the infamous dim x),etc. and longs only when I know the > number has a chance to exceed the integer limit. I hope you are not > arguing integers are "bad" because they are less efficient, take up > more cycles, etc. Using that standard we should all be programming > using assembler. > > Jim Hale > > -- -Francisco http://pcthis.blogspot.com |PC news with out the jargon! http://sqlthis.blogspot.com | Tsql and More... -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com -- AccessD mailing list AccessD at databaseadvisors.com http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com