Don wrote: > On Wednesday, 30 January 2013 at 12:51:18 UTC, Simen Kjaeraas wrote: > >On 2013-01-30, 09:26, Don wrote: > > > >>The discussion we had on github agreed that std.halffloat isn't > >>a good place. > >>But OTOH std.numeric needs a complete overhaul, it's a mess. > >>It would be a mistake to throw it in there. > > > >So put it somewhere else for the moment, and move it to > >std.numeric after > >a while? Boy, does that ever sound stupid. > > Yes, of course that would be stupid. It will never be in > std.numeric. > > >I say stuff it in std.numeric, and announce properly that someone > >should > >probably have look at fixing std.numeric, and that HalfFloat in > >there may > >be the only thing salvageable (not that I know if it is, but > >that's how > >you make it sound). > > std.numeric is not superficially flawed, it's fundamentally flawed. > What is it for? What is its theme? The problem is, std.numeric is > one of the few good names which are left as a possible package name, > after C insulted the mathematical community by creating a module > called 'math'.
Dimitry said this once. Why not start from scratch with package called std.numerics? // for numeric types std.numerics.halffloat std.numerics.complex std.numerics.quaternion ... // algorithms working with numeric types std.numerics.algorithms // even std.math could make sense or something similar. Wouldn't this work? Jens
