Hi Gregg, I don't mean that the pair! datatype is not useful or attractive, it is for the reasons you outlined and many more.
I have lots of ideas about pair like datatypes. Co-ordinate! 1.234x5.678 Complex! 1.234-5.678i Ratio! 1/3 However I don't get to decide what goes into REBOL ;-) My point is that by conciously deciding to disable the pair! datatype to be used with the greater than / less than comparator function, for the reasons Holger outlined, which i disagree with and are an unneccesary and artificial restriction in my opinion, then the pair! datatype is "lame" in comparison with some of the other numeric datatypes, tuple!'s as I gave in my example spring immediately to mind . But REBOL is RT's baby so it's really up to them, I suppose I can only keep working away to increase my understanding of REBOL and it's behaviour / implementation because I really do still believe in "A better means of Expression, A better means of operation." I've no wish to open up the whole old open / proprietary debate again, so I'll shut up now. Cheers Gregg, Mark Dickson. In a message dated Thu, 7 Feb 2002 1:50:25 PM Eastern Standard Time, "Gregg Irwin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hi Mark, > > << Is Pair! a lame datatype? >> > > Nope, at least not IMO. For one thing, it can save lots of effort when > scaling and sizing. Using them as direction guides for gradient effects > seemed a little odd to me at first, but I got over that pretty quickly. > > They also make it very easy to write rectangle intersection and union > routines. > > --Gregg > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the > subject, without the quotes. -- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, without the quotes.
