Then again, using type wrappers for this – bare numbers are Radians while an immutable Degree wrapper could wrap values in degrees – would eliminate a large class of common programming errors when working with angles.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Steven G. Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Monday, March 2, 2015 at 7:57:10 PM UTC-5, MA Laforge wrote: >> >> The real question is how much programming overhead is required to use >> these types (assuming the compiler does the grunt work reducing the >> *performance* overhead) >> > > No, the real question is whether the benefit of using special types for > radians vs. degrees would outweigh the costs of retraining every single > user from every single previous mainstream programming language. To me, > there is no contest — doing angles differently from every other programming > language would impose enormous costs in teaching, documentation, and > support (imagine the never-ending flood of mailing-list questions) that > would completely overwhelm the benefit of eliminating a "d" suffix on a few > functions and automating a few angle conversions. >
