At 05:12 PM 10/10/2001 +0200, RaFaL Pocztarski wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
>
> > At 08:37 AM 10/9/2001 -0700, Brent Dax wrote:
> > >For consistency, I'd prefer to use is: 3+(2 is i).
> >
> > Well, the convention is suffixing an imaginary number with an i. I don't
> > think we'd be too well served to go a different route.
>
>So the imaginary numbers would be standard literals? Like
>
> $x=2+10i;
>
>Great idea, as well as sqrt(-1) returning 1i istead of raising the
>exception.
If we do them, yep. Currently no promises there.
>BTW, I was thinking once that numeral literals like 4k or 10G
>(meaning 4*2**10, 10*2**30) would be very nice. What do you think?
I think the meaning of the suffices are sufficiently vague as to make me
uncomfortable supporting them. Is 1K 1024 or 1000? I can make a good case
for both, and that's never a good sign.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
