Isaac Whitfield <[email protected]> schrieb am Mi., 22. Nov. 2017 um 22:55 Uhr:
> Wouldn't the outcome `not Integer.is_negative(:atom)` be even worse than >> what we have now? > > > What do you mean by worse? If you take the face value of what the macro > does "is this a negative integer?", then no, it's not worse. > > Well, it has been proposed as an alternative to `is_non_negative/1`, which it clearly isn't which my example shows. Personally I prefer to simply stick to our current explicit `is_number(x) and x > @threshold` and friends over a set of macros that only covers an arbitrarily chosen threshold. If something is introduced at all, it should be `m.gt`, `m.lt`, `m.gte`, and `m.lte`, where `m` is `Integer`, `Float`, and `Kernel` which are integer, float and number guarded. Bye, Norbert -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "elixir-lang-core" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/elixir-lang-core/CA%2BbCVsvXFdVR9NOEs81S%2BNZTz30euJoPNOkGxLPJwHVp%2BrNxGQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
