DD == Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net writes:
Some tiny thoughts:
DD ... I would consider Numeric more broad, such as to include
DD anything that might conceivably be called a number, probably
DD user-defined, that isn't representable by a complex.
Is Numeric intended to have a guarantee
Darren Duncan wrote:
For the integer version, my understanding is that number theory already
provides a suitable term, Gaussian integer, which is a complex number
whose real and imaginary parts are both integers.
So I suggest using Gaussian as the name option for an IntComplex.
Or maybe
Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
Did you consider discrete?
I think that Discrete could work quite well as the role that
encapsulates the ways in which Integer and Gauss are alike. It may
even be genralizable beyond that, although there might be some discord
between theory and practice. (In theory,
Jon Lang wrote:
Ruud H.G. van Tol wrote:
Did you consider discrete?
I think that Discrete could work quite well as the role that
encapsulates the ways in which Integer and Gauss are alike. It may
even be genralizable beyond that, although there might be some discord
between theory and
Darren Duncan wrote:
I'm inclined to consider a Discrete to be broad enough to include Boolean,
as well as every single enum type in general; it would also include Order,
say. So I would also then add a more specific something, say
DiscreteNumeric.
There are discrete things that are not
Jon Lang wrote:
Remember also: we're putting together the Perl 6 core here; we need to
show some discretion in terms of what to include vs. what gets farmed
out to perl 6 modules. I suspect that gaussian integers belong
firmly in the latter camp; as such, they are germane to discussions
about
At 18:14 -0800 3/14/10, Jon Lang wrote:
There are discrete things that are not ordered (such as gaussian
integers), and there are ordered things that are not discrete (such as
real numbers or strings).
The word discrete as in atoms are the discrete view of matter may turn out to
be confusing to
