Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer baby graphics bug

> On 24 April 2010 02:05, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer
>>
>> reports an error: MessageNotUnderstood: Quadrangle>>costume.
>>
>> Squeak 4.1 fresh image.
>>
>>
>>    
> Ouch... where you dug out this dusty stuff? :)
>
>  

> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> On 24 April 2010 02:05, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer
>>>
>>> reports an error: MessageNotUnderstood: Quadrangle>>costume.
>>>
>>> Squeak 4.1 fresh image.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Ouch... where you dug out this dusty stuff? :)
>>
>>
> Was rummaging around, trying to figure out how to implement a mandelbrot set
> thingie, and saw that  example.

> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Lawson English wrote:
>
>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>> On 24 April 2010 02:05, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer
>>>>
>>>> reports an error: MessageNotUnderstood: Quadrangle>>costume.
>>>>
>>>> Squeak 4.1 fresh image.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Ouch... where you dug out this dusty stuff? :)
>>>
>>>
>> Was rummaging around, trying to figure out how to implement a
>> mandelbrot set thingie, and saw that  example.
>
> Have a look at: http://squeaksource.com/MandelMorph2.html
> It won't load smoothly, because some method has floats which use
> obsolete formatting (- 2.5), but after fixing those (remove the space
> between - and 2.5) you can evaluate this:
>
> MandelMorph2 new openInWorld
>
>
> Levente
>
>

> Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Lawson English wrote:
>>
>>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>> On 24 April 2010 02:05, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer
>>>>>
>>>>> reports an error: MessageNotUnderstood: Quadrangle>>costume.
>>>>>
>>>>> Squeak 4.1 fresh image.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Ouch... where you dug out this dusty stuff? :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Was rummaging around, trying to figure out how to implement a mandelbrot
>>> set thingie, and saw that  example.
>>
>> Have a look at: http://squeaksource.com/MandelMorph2.html
>> It won't load smoothly, because some method has floats which use obsolete
>> formatting (- 2.5), but after fixing those (remove the space between - and
>> 2.5) you can evaluate this:
>>
>> MandelMorph2 new openInWorld
>>
>>
>> Levente
>>
>>
>
> Thanks. I'm still a noob though. How do I fix a package that has errors when
> I try to load it?

> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Lawson English wrote:
>
>> Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>> On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Lawson English wrote:
>>>
>>>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>>>> On 24 April 2010 02:05, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Quadrangle >> exampleInViewer
>>>>>>
>>>>>> reports an error: MessageNotUnderstood: Quadrangle>>costume.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Squeak 4.1 fresh image.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> Ouch... where you dug out this dusty stuff? :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Was rummaging around, trying to figure out how to implement a
>>>> mandelbrot set thingie, and saw that  example.
>>>
>>> Have a look at: http://squeaksource.com/MandelMorph2.html
>>> It won't load smoothly, because some method has floats which use
>>> obsolete formatting (- 2.5), but after fixing those (remove the
>>> space between - and 2.5) you can evaluate this:
>>>
>>> MandelMorph2 new openInWorld
>>>
>>>
>>> Levente
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Thanks. I'm still a noob though. How do I fix a package that has
>> errors when I try to load it?
>
> You'll get a Syntax Error window. Fix the code there and press cmd+s
> on mac or alt+s on other platforms.
> Normally this should be enough, but there's a problem with MC. It's
> not able to load methods other than the fixed one for some reason. So
> I closed the debugger and merged the package, but rejected the fixed
> method.
> I saved the package and uploaded here:
> http://leves.web.elte.hu/squeak/MandelMorph2-ul.3.mcz
>

>
> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to
> save back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a
> password.   I converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to
> see if there was an easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed
> down to < Apple ][ speeds when I did that.
>
>
> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's
> some glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
> Fractions....
>
>

> Lawson English wrote:
>>
>> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to save
>> back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a password.   I
>> converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to see if there was an
>> easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed down to < Apple ][ speeds
>> when I did that.
>>
>>
>> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's some
>> glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
>> Fractions....
>>
>>
> Or maybe  things like x^100/y^100   takes a rather long time to calculate...
>

>
> sigh...
>
>
> So an arbitrary precision Mandelbrot generator in Squeak isn't going to be a
> cakewalk, apparently, or perhaps I'm missing something else obvious.
>
>
> Lawson
>

> On 24 April 2010 10:55, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>  
>> Lawson English wrote:
>>    
>>> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to save
>>> back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a password.   I
>>> converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to see if there was an
>>> easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed down to < Apple ][ speeds
>>> when I did that.
>>>
>>>
>>> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's some
>>> glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
>>> Fractions....
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>> Or maybe  things like x^100/y^100   takes a rather long time to calculate...
>>
>>    
>
> you can optimize, rather than multiplying x*x*...*x 100 times in a row,
>
> use a power of two numerics.
> Given that:
> x^y = (x^a)*(x^b)
> where y = a+b
>
> so,
>
> x^100 = (x^64)*(x^32)*(x^4)
>
> then, you can reuse an intermediate results of computation i.e:
>
> x2 := x*x.
> x4 := x2*x2.
> x8 := x4*x4.
> x16 := x8*x8.
> x32 := x16*x16.
> x64 := x32*x32.
>
> result := x64*x32*x4.
>
> so, totally 8 multiplications, instead of 100.
>
>  
>

> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> On 24 April 2010 10:55, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>  
>>> Lawson English wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to
>>>> save
>>>> back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a
>>>> password.   I
>>>> converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to see if
>>>> there was an
>>>> easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed down to < Apple
>>>> ][ speeds
>>>> when I did that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's
>>>> some
>>>> glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
>>>> Fractions....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>      
>>> Or maybe  things like x^100/y^100   takes a rather long time to
>>> calculate...
>>>
>>>    
>>
>> you can optimize, rather than multiplying x*x*...*x 100 times in a row,
>>
>> use a power of two numerics.
>> Given that:
>> x^y = (x^a)*(x^b)
>> where y = a+b
>>
>> so,
>>
>> x^100 = (x^64)*(x^32)*(x^4)
>>
>> then, you can reuse an intermediate results of computation i.e:
>>
>> x2 := x*x.
>> x4 := x2*x2.
>> x8 := x4*x4.
>> x16 := x8*x8.
>> x32 := x16*x16.
>> x64 := x32*x32.
>>
>> result := x64*x32*x4.
>>
>> so, totally 8 multiplications, instead of 100.
>>
>>  
>

> where the  real and imaginary  were already set as scaledDecimal: 1000
>
> so a test after each new run would give 7 levels of color for z^128
> and run 12 times faster.
>
> only 1.4 seconds per pixel. Getting close... ;-)
>
>
> Lawson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>> On 24 April 2010 10:55, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Lawson English wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to save
>>>> back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a password.
>>>> I
>>>> converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to see if there was
>>>> an
>>>> easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed down to < Apple ][
>>>> speeds
>>>> when I did that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's some
>>>> glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
>>>> Fractions....
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> Or maybe  things like x^100/y^100   takes a rather long time to
>>> calculate...
>>>
>>>
>>
>> you can optimize, rather than multiplying x*x*...*x 100 times in a row,
>>
>> use a power of two numerics.
>> Given that:
>> x^y = (x^a)*(x^b)
>> where y = a+b
>>
>> so,
>>
>> x^100 = (x^64)*(x^32)*(x^4)
>>
>> then, you can reuse an intermediate results of computation i.e:
>>
>> x2 := x*x.
>> x4 := x2*x2.
>> x8 := x4*x4.
>> x16 := x8*x8.
>> x32 := x16*x16.
>> x64 := x32*x32.
>>
>> result := x64*x32*x4.
>>
>> so, totally 8 multiplications, instead of 100.
>>
>>
> Interesting. I'm not quite sure if it would work for colorizing the M set
> boundaries though, since that is typically done based on the number of
> iterations before the number goes out of bounds.
>
> I guess a logarithmic index could be used for  the color table instead of a
> linear index...
>
> I worked out a simple way to truncate calculations to an arbitrary number of
> digits.  Unless my algorithm is wrong, I can do 100 recursive
> Complex>>squared calculations at 1000 decimal points of precision in only 17
> seconds (i.e. 100TimesRepeat: ["z := z^2"]). Which is a tad too slow for the
> M set.
> [ b:= b*b. b real: (ScaledDecimal readFrom: (b real)asString).   b imaginary:
> (ScaledDecimal readFrom: (b imaginary) asString)]

>
> where the  real and imaginary  were already set as scaledDecimal: 1000
>
> so a test after each new run would give 7 levels of color for z^128 and run
> 12 times faster.
>
> only 1.4 seconds per pixel. Getting close... ;-)
>
>
> Lawson
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

> On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Lawson English wrote:
>
>> Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>> On 24 April 2010 10:55, Lawson English <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawson English wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Thanks. I had gotten that far with John Dougan's help and tried to
>>>>> save
>>>>> back to the repository but it wouldn't accept since I lack a
>>>>> password. I
>>>>> converted all references of Floats to Fractions just to see if
>>>>> there was an
>>>>> easy way to give it higher precision but it slowed down to < Apple
>>>>> ][ speeds
>>>>> when I did that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Obviously the naive way isn't going to work. I gotta think there's
>>>>> some
>>>>> glitch with what I did, or incompatibility with the algorithm and
>>>>> Fractions....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Or maybe  things like x^100/y^100   takes a rather long time to
>>>> calculate...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> you can optimize, rather than multiplying x*x*...*x 100 times in a row,
>>>
>>> use a power of two numerics.
>>> Given that:
>>> x^y = (x^a)*(x^b)
>>> where y = a+b
>>>
>>> so,
>>>
>>> x^100 = (x^64)*(x^32)*(x^4)
>>>
>>> then, you can reuse an intermediate results of computation i.e:
>>>
>>> x2 := x*x.
>>> x4 := x2*x2.
>>> x8 := x4*x4.
>>> x16 := x8*x8.
>>> x32 := x16*x16.
>>> x64 := x32*x32.
>>>
>>> result := x64*x32*x4.
>>>
>>> so, totally 8 multiplications, instead of 100.
>>>
>>>
>> Interesting. I'm not quite sure if it would work for colorizing the M
>> set boundaries though, since that is typically done based on the
>> number of iterations before the number goes out of bounds.
>>
>> I guess a logarithmic index could be used for  the color table
>> instead of a linear index...
>>
>> I worked out a simple way to truncate calculations to an arbitrary
>> number of digits.  Unless my algorithm is wrong, I can do 100
>> recursive Complex>>squared calculations at 1000 decimal points of
>> precision in only 17 seconds (i.e. 100TimesRepeat: ["z := z^2"]).
>> Which is a tad too slow for the M set.
>> [ b:= b*b. b real: (ScaledDecimal readFrom: (b real)asString).   b
>> imaginary: (ScaledDecimal readFrom: (b imaginary) asString)]
>
> Use [b squared] instead of [b * b], it's faster for Fractions and
> ScaledDecimals.
>
> Do not convert the number to string and then to number again, it's
> just waste of time.
>
>
> Levente
>

> Try:
>
>
> c := Complex real: (1.2 asScaledDecimal:10) imaginary: (1.2
> asScaledDecimal:10).
>
> 10timesRepeat: [c:= c squared].
> c inspect. =>
>
> real:    
> 16179076657442150770853527851353155726471298091691031267189857182080975646647625504506668234175586148214521889505305242253040644884123843893796453862895583845336242846950815779868456294176417920312278659887541612423662820348021785747119.6681587347s10
>
> imaginary:     0.0000000000s10
>
> see what I mean? You gotta truncate or it takes forever and/or
> crashes/hangs squeak.
>