Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

HaloO, On Thursday, 26. June 2008 18:46:25 Larry Wall wrote: > Neither "is" nor "does" is quite right here, because the mathematicians > have seen fit to confuse representation semantics with value semantics. :) Hmm, but the uppercase types should hide the representation type. IOW, there's only

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

* Aristotle Pagaltzis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-29 02:05]: > [repeat of statements made days ago] Sorry, I was only just catching up and didn’t notice this orphan subthread had siblings, where the point was already covered. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis //

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

* Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-06-26 20:20]: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:31 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Most financial institutions don't use float, rational or > > fixed point, they just keep integer pennies. > > I'm not so sure about that. There are lots of financial > transact

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Larry Wall wrote: but probably what the financial insitutions want is special fixed-point types that assume a divisor anyway. Would any financial institution care to comment? Some (VAT tax) computations are defined, by law, to be executed with a cetain precision. You have to be able to contr

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Larry Wall wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:50:21PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: > : I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. > : Then it seems to make sense to assume: > : Int is Rat > : Rat is Num > : Num is Complex > : or am I off again? > > Well, there's this little thing called Lisko

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

> "RR" == Ryan Richter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: RR> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:55:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >> We could go as far as to guarantee that Nums do rational arithmetic >> out to a certain point, but probably what the financial insitutions >> want is special fixed-poin

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:31 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Most financial institutions don't use float, rational or fixed point, they > just keep integer pennies. I'm not so sure about that. There are lots of financial transactions that deal in sub-$0.01 fractions: taxes, currency conversion,

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:46:25AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: : the VM somehow sneaks in the appropriate conversion for us if we : actually try to pass an Int to a Rat. I'd point out that this is fundamentally the same decision point that is reached when we want to do boxing, because we basically ha

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Most financial institutions don't use float, rational or fixed point, they just keep integer pennies. -- Mark Biggar [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Original message -- From: Larry Wall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Would any financial instituti

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:55:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: > We could go as far as to guarantee that Nums do rational arithmetic > out to a certain point, but probably what the financial insitutions > want is special fixed-point types that assume a divisor anyway. > Would any financial institution

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 12:45:39PM -0400, Mark J. Reed wrote: : Moritz Lenz> 3.14 would be a Rat or a Float or whatever : : That's a good question, actually. Does the literal "3.14" get turned : into a Float or a Rat? Float is probably simplest, and matches what : e.g. Lisp does, but you could a

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:50:21PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: : I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. : Then it seems to make sense to assume: : Int is Rat : Rat is Num : Num is Complex : or am I off again? Well, there's this little thing called Liskov substitutability... Neither "is"

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Moritz Lenz> 3.14 would be a Rat or a Float or whatever That's a good question, actually. Does the literal "3.14" get turned into a Float or a Rat? Float is probably simplest, and matches what e.g. Lisp does, but you could argue either way. Especially since many exact decimal literals become ap

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:50:21PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: > What's the alternative? > I don't think it's a good idea to special-case numeric types, and I > don't think it's a good idea to define multis for each numeric type either. > > I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. > Then it

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:40:53AM -0400, Trey Harris wrote: > In a message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Moritz Lenz writes: > >I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. > >Then it seems to make sense to assume: > >Int is Rat > >Rat is Num > >Num is Complex > >or am I off again? > > S29 seems t

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Trey Harris wrote: > In a message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Moritz Lenz writes: >> I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. >> Then it seems to make sense to assume: >> Int is Rat >> Rat is Num >> Num is Complex >> or am I off again? > > S29 seems to have been assuming this, if I'm reading

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

In a message dated Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Moritz Lenz writes: I assume that 'Num' is meant to be a non-complex. Then it seems to make sense to assume: Int is Rat Rat is Num Num is Complex or am I off again? S29 seems to have been assuming this, if I'm reading the multis correctly. -- Trey Harris

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

Mark J. Reed wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Moritz Lenz > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Thanks for the effort, but it also raises new questions. For example: >>> Int is Num >> Rakudo doesn't do it that way, because the 'A is B' relation in OO means >> "Every instance of A is also an Ins

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Moritz Lenz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks for the effort, but it also raises new questions. For example: >> Int is Num > Rakudo doesn't do it that way, because the 'A is B' relation in OO means > "Every instance of A is also an Instance of B", which certainly

Re: Rakudo test miscellanea

(cross-posting to p6l) Ryan Richter wrote: > On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 11:36:05AM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote: >> 2) How do we know which numeric type is a class and which is a role? Is >> there an explicit spec about the types of number literals? That could >> have some impact on type checking in th