On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 11:22:22AM -0700, Doug McNutt wrote:
: See FORTRAN conventions to continue.
Well, I don't think FORTRAN implicit conventions will fly anymore,
but basically I think I agree with you that different contexts will
want to warp what they mean by "numeric". Leaving aside the wh
At 09:24 -0800 1/2/07, Larry Wall wrote:
>But I'm also still wondering whether a simpler approach is to declare
>that Num is a role that can encapsulate objects of class Int, Num,
>Rat, or Dec as necessary. There also a lot to be said for simple...
Simple. . . YES! but I'm in no position to help
On Tue, Jan 02, 2007 at 09:24:20AM -0800, Larry Wall wrote:
: But I'm also still wondering whether a simpler approach is to declare
: that Num is a role that can encapsulate objects of class Int, Num,
: Rat, or Dec as necessary. There also a lot to be said for simple...
Well, that's wrong several
On Sun, Dec 31, 2006 at 03:02:08AM -0800, Darren Duncan wrote:
: At 9:34 AM + 12/29/06, Luke Palmer wrote:
: >When do we do integer/rational math and when do we do floating point math?
: >
: >That is, is 1 different from 1.0? Should 10**500 be infinity or a 1
: >with 500 zeroes after it? Shou
