[Monetdb-developers] RFC: New Integer Atoms: byte & word

Stefan Manegold Stefan.Manegold at cwi.nl
Thu Dec 8 15:23:21 CET 2005

Dear MonetDB developers,

I'm almost done with the first steps of adding two new integer atoms to

a) a tiny (8-bit) integer.

b) a machine-word sized integer that grows with the system, i.e., 32-bit on
   32-bit systems and 64-bit on 64-bit systems.

(a) is supposed to replace "chr" wherever "chr" is not used as a character type,
but as a (tiny) 1-byte integer.

(b) is supposed to be the MIL pendant of the C type "var_t" and can/should
be used, e.g., for BUN counts of BATs which are limited to 32-bit on 32-bit
systems, but can grow to 64-bit on 64-bit systems.

For now, I chose the following names, sticking to the 3-letter "design", and
picking combinations that do not yet exist in the code base:

	a)	"bte"	(read "byte")
	b)	"wrd"	(read "word")

In a first checking (hopefully sometime next week), I will only add these new
atoms (and add the proper functionality & new signatures where necessary),
but not change any existing MIL proc/command signatures.

In a second check-in (maybe also already next week?), I plan to change (at
least) the signature(s) of "count(BAT[any,any]) : int" & "count(int) : lng"
to a single "count(BAT[any,any]) : wrd".

Maybe, I/we should later also consider to replace "chr" by "bte" in the enum

Well, so far so good. 

I would be grateful, if you could comment on these plans.

Especially, I'd like to hear, whether there are better(?) suggestions for
the names "bte" & "wrd".
Further, did I miss any places, where we should/must use "bte" iso. "chr" 
and/or "wrd" iso. "int"/"lng"?

Thank you very much in advance!


| Dr. Stefan Manegold | mailto:Stefan.Manegold at cwi.nl |
| CWI,  P.O.Box 94079 | http://www.cwi.nl/~manegold/  |
| 1090 GB Amsterdam   | Tel.: +31 (20) 592-4212       |
| The Netherlands     | Fax : +31 (20) 592-4312       |

More information about the developers-list mailing list