I think the ArbFloatNN names seem clearest. Calling these DigitsNN does seem misleading since digits are technically only decimal.
On Sun, Jan 3, 2016 at 11:05 PM, Jeffrey Sarnoff <[email protected]> wrote: > I thought DecimalNN would be decimal format. I chose Digits30 because it > is geared to display 30 digits (base 10) accurately. > To call these BallNN or ArbNN would be doing a disservice to the Arb > software .. I am using Arb, but only partially and not as an > interval-valued entity. > For that reason, I do not want to use BallNN or ArbNN for this. Thoughts? > > > On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 11:01:31 PM UTC-5, Scott Jones wrote: >> >> I think the DIGITSxxx names makes it sound like this might be a decimal >> format, which seems a bit of a concern. >> What about Ball128, Ball256, etc. or Arb*, or ArbFloat*? >> Distinguishing Arb floating types from plain old IEEE floats is good, >> IMO, since these seem a lot more interesting! ;-) >> >> On Sunday, January 3, 2016 at 4:53:31 PM UTC-5, Jeffrey Sarnoff wrote: >>> >>> FloatHigher.jl <https://github.com/J-Sarnoff/FloatHigher.jl> has been >>> revised. It now exports Digits30, Digits70, Digits140, Digits300 instead >>> of FloatNN type names. Additionally, showball(x) is available (see README >>> for examples). >>> The individual files will follow, renamed DIGITS30.jl >>> <https://github.com/J-Sarnoff/DIGITS30.jl>, DIGITS70.jl >>> <https://github.com/J-Sarnoff/DIGITS70.jl>, DIGITS140.jl >>> <https://github.com/J-Sarnoff/DIGITS140.jl>, DIGITS300.jl >>> <https://github.com/J-Sarnoff/DIGITS300.jl>. >>> >>> The choice of digit lengths is a balance of utility and internal >>> efficiency. >>> >>
