On 9/28/18 10:37 AM, Brandon Allbery wrote:
We're going to have a problem if "infinity" is not allowed in the presence of some programmers. "All values" can mean too many things in too many situations. And I don't think using * works here, quite, precisely because it can mean too many things.
Agreed. I think the issue is with the wording of Inf: https://docs.perl6.org/type/Num#index-entry-Inf_%28definition%29-Inf The value Inf is an instance of Num and represents value that's too large to represent in 64-bit double-precision floating point number Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity Infinity (symbol: ∞) is a concept describing something without any bound or larger than any natural number. "without any bound" is what Inf is being used for here. I see it as "larger than any natural number". So I am probably the one at fault. When I read the manual, Perl Speak over rules common speak. So I was taking Inf's Perl defination literally. Proposed change for your criticism: The value Inf (Infinity) represents "without bound" or "no limit" (meaning "all possible values") when used as an argument. Inf when used as an instance of Num and represents a value that's too large to represent in 64-bit double-precision floating point number What do you think? -T
