Ok, ArbFloatNN it will be. On Mon, Jan 4, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Stefan Karpinski <[email protected]> wrote:
> 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. >>>> >>> >
