Oh, I just realized that I used the wrong word, so let me rephrase that:

What's the name of the library you're talking about? Maybe the *pros* of a
core implementation can be highlighted if we can see the limitations of a
user-land approach.

Best,
Erick

Em ter., 12 de dez. de 2023 às 18:52, Erick de Azevedo Lima <
ericklima.c...@gmail.com> escreveu:

> Hi Jordan.
>
> What's the name of the library you're talking about? Maybe the cons of a
> core implementation can be highlighted if we can see the limitations of a
> user-land approach.
>
> Best,
> Erick
>
> Em ter., 12 de dez. de 2023 às 18:35, Jordan LeDoux <
> jordan.led...@gmail.com> escreveu:
>
>> On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 1:26 PM Larry Garfield <la...@garfieldtech.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023, at 1:03 PM, G. P. B. wrote:
>> >
>> > > The issue is that I don't think having arbitrary precision decimals
>> as a
>> > > core language feature is a necessity compared to rational types.
>> > > A cast from rational to float wouldn't produce a large round trip,
>> > whereas
>> > > trying to figure out arbitrary precision is more difficult.
>> > > But in any case, having a declare/INI or whatever that changes the
>> > > behaviour of the engine/language is not a good design choice.
>> >
>> > I don't have strong feelings about arbitrary precision decimals either
>> > way, but I do strongly agree with this point.  Having the language
>> behavior
>> > (including the precision of numbers) change with an ini setting is
>> > long-understood to be a bad idea, and we've been trying to phase it
>> out.  A
>> > decimal feature that relies on a language-affecting ini setting is just
>> not
>> > going to fly these days, IMO, and rightly so.
>> >
>> > I am curious, GB, if you're proposing an actual `rational` type, which
>> > stores values internally as just numerator and denominator separately
>> until
>> > some point when it renders down to a float (eg, on print)?  That sounds
>> > neat, though I am nowhere near expert enough in that area to say what
>> ugly
>> > edge cases that might run into.
>> >
>> > --Larry Garfield
>> >
>>
>> I agree that an INI setting or declare is wrong for this.
>>
>> The ugly edge cases on a native rational type tend to be in complex
>> algorithms, which many libraries deal with by converting the rational to a
>> float or decimal for those complex algorithms and just avoiding the issue.
>> (Algorithms like `sin()`, `atan()`, or `exp()`). It's not an unsolveable
>> problem if you really want rational types. There are libraries that do it.
>> But unless there's someone here volunteering, it's probably a non-starter,
>> as that's something I won't touch.
>>
>> Jordan
>>
>

Reply via email to