On 30 Oct 2002 at 15:24, Jonathan Scott Duff wrote: > On Wed, Oct 30, 2002 at 11:10:54PM +0200, Markus Laire wrote: > > If we are going to do math with ranges, we definitely need non- > > discreet ranges also. Or at least make sure it's easy enough to > > implement as a class. > > > > (1.9 .. 2.1) + (5..7) * (72.49 .. 72.51); > > I don't think that "non-discrete ranges" is what you mean. Perhaps > you just want ranges whose step size is something other than 1 > > (1.9 .. 2.1 : 0.1) + (5..7) * (72.49 .. 72.51 : 0.01)
That would also be usefull, but I definitely mean math with non-discrete ranges. How else are you going to calculate with numbers which have 'uncertainty-range' (not sure about right term) i.e. all math in physics. There are bound to be other uses. This should probably be a class, so only problem is then to be sure that it's possible to create such a class and use it with easy syntax. Then there is a question of what such expressions should return. A superposition of non-discrete anges encompassing all the possible solutions would be the easy way. Adding probability distributions to those ranges would also be usefull. Still this is an implementation detail. -- Markus Laire 'malaire' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
