On Wed, Oct 10, 2007 at 10:32:55PM +0200, Henning Thielemann wrote: > On Wed, 10 Oct 2007, David Roundy wrote: > > I think it's quite sensible, for instance, that passing a negative > >number as the first argument of (**) with the second argument > >non-integer leads to a NaN. > > It would better to disallow negative bases completely for (**), because > integers should be explicitly typed as integers and then (^^) can be used. > I have already seen (x**2) and (e ** x) with (e = exp 1) in a Haskell > library. Even better would be support for statically checked non-negative > numbers.
I agree. -- David Roundy Department of Physics Oregon State University _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
