Not bad for fat integers, I think the more complete function captures this behavior and does these examples:

 

Hey Steve I was thinking - uh oh, get ready...

...and I know you're infinitely busy already, all thoughts and prayers going your way. That said, can I humbly encourage your QB64 Bible project to hit the issue of floating point math next? Even if it wasn't the next chapter you were going to write, we need something final on this question once and for all. It comes up way too often in the forums. The proper write-up should minimize out-of-house references, and be something written entirely by us, for us -  and you're the guy to do it Steve. The challenge is to write it out *so good* that it answers every question that ever came up about floating point math in qb64.exe, and also anticipates every future question that may arise. Do whatever you want to do, but make this section stand perfectly alone, and write it soon. No references to other chapters, just a stand alone gospel on QB64's float.

This might make the overall project feel less daunting. Do chapters by demand. Do float while it's fresh. Invest the 10,000 keystrokes and you'll save us all 100,000. Pretty Virginia Please.

The question of "how to expand QB64's userbase by getting it to run on XYZ hardware" is a completely expired question. Forget it.

The real way to grow QB64 as a language is to return to its *intended* roots, which is to provide an accessible platform for anyone, at any level, to write code and get it to run. The true BASIC way. Listen boys, while QB64 as a *language* does this very thing, QB64.exe does not. QB64.exe, even with its GL backbone, is still a combustion horse trying to keep pace in an age of electric cars and rockets. The answer to the conundrum on hand is to somehow keep the *spirit* of QB64 whilst shedding the husk of its pasta code.

Enter dbox. Our Galleon 2.0. His qbjs project is SO good, came from such a new direction, that people don't even realize the answer has already arrived. I don't care if QB64.exe has more features, or has a dubugger, all of that is nil. What dbox has is a thing that runs QB64 code on any device (coming soon, just a matter of interface). This is it. Repent repent repent, for the lord has arrived early. Am I getting through to everyone?

The job now is to (i) let dbox round off the corners while receiving useful feedback from everyone, (ii) start to mass old-but-gold classics that can be showcased in qbjs, (iii) bulldog the hell out of this thing on the Internet. Make it known that BASIC really is back *in spirit*. It's on every machine that has a browser. It's in your face like it used to be. Microsoft blew it, every OS blew it, here now is your BASIC, just paste your code and go (just about).

Do that, and we grow. I'm sure of it.

Not really sure what's going on here overall, but I had to fix the pendulum:

my ted talk on const, 2022 edition:
const is completely redundant to ordinary variables, and its implemented more stupidly. so don't use it.
no, i mean it: const is nothing but a brain diaper. if you aren't sure whether you're editing your variables, you should go use an easy language like QBAS--- wait. step away from the computer instead.
... and that's what i say!

my credentials for having this opinion:
i do motivational talks for battered women and entertainment at youth mitzvah parties

REDACTED

Hey MasterGy,

I think I understand what you're saying. I use a similar piece of mathematics for mouse controls in my pendulum code:

(There may be a version of it floating around that shows a trail behind the mouse pointer.)