On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 10:27:28 -0700 (PDT)
Steven Devijver <steven.devij...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 jun, 16:38, Mike Meyer <mwm-keyword-googlegroups.
> 620...@mired.org> wrote:
> >
> > Why? It isn't supported for rationals or exponents. Or are you
> > claiming that because we support "3/4" we should also support
> >
> > (* (my-complicated-algo val)/(my-other-complicated-algo exp)
> > 1/(another-complicated-algo exp2))
> >
> > with similar problems because we support "1e3"?
>
> What would (Math/pow (Math/E (* 2/5 2 Math/PI i))) return?
Why is this relevant to a discussion of whether or not support for
complex literals is desirable? All but "i" is involved with the
semantics of complex values, not the literal.
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <m...@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
