Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> The "any" function is just like any other function taking an arbitrary list
> of arguments (including user-defined functions). As such it parses with
> lower precedence than comparison operators -- so "eq" binds more tightly
> than "any".
Thanks, makes sense.
> I'm
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Joseph Brenner wrote:
> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>
> > The "any" function is just like any other function taking an arbitrary list
> > of arguments (including user-defined functions). As such it parses with
> > lower precedence than comparison operators -- so "eq" binds mor
BEGIN trait_mod:(&any, :tighter(&infix:<*>));
comes to mind, but that doesn't seem to do the trick.
> On 22 Jun 2020, at 21:11, Tobias Boege wrote:
>
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Joseph Brenner wrote:
>> Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
>>
>>> The "any" function is just like any other function taking an a
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Elizabeth Mattijsen wrote:
> BEGIN trait_mod:(&any, :tighter(&infix:<*>));
>
> comes to mind, but that doesn't seem to do the trick.
>
My guess: tighter and looser are only consulted by the parser
in contexts where 'any' was recognized as an *operator*.
Hi all,
First, I'm naive in Raku. Then let's go to my question.
I'm trying to figure out why we got so different results here:
> e.Rat()**(pi.Rat()*i)
-0.9902-1.3942922582021257e-07i
> e**(pi*i)
-1+1.2246467991473532e-16i
> e.Rat()**(pi.Rat()*i) == e**(pi*i)
False
I understand the N
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Aureliano Guedes wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> First, I'm naive in Raku. Then let's go to my question.
>
> I'm trying to figure out why we got so different results here:
>
> > e.Rat()**(pi.Rat()*i)
> -0.9902-1.3942922582021257e-07i
> > e**(pi*i)
> -1+1.2246467991473532e-1
Thank you for the clarification.
There is a method to set Rat precision at the scope of the program to apply
to all *.Rat() cases?
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 5:57 PM Tobias Boege wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Aureliano Guedes wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > First, I'm naive in Raku. Then let's go to
On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Aureliano Guedes wrote:
> Thank you for the clarification.
>
> There is a method to set Rat precision at the scope of the program to apply
> to all *.Rat() cases?
>
I don't know, based on a quick search in the documentation, of any global
setting. The hacky solution would be
Thanks again.
I'm trying to get proficiency in Raku by converting some Python programs
mine in Raku.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 6:41 PM Tobias Boege wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2020, Aureliano Guedes wrote:
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > There is a method to set Rat precision at the scop
