Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-22 Thread BaldEagleX02
I think zero is not positive nor negative. In fact some mathematicians consider 
it "neutral". I believe we should consider it natural but not positive, as it 
is already


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-22 Thread BaldEagleX02
And starts at 0


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-22 Thread BaldEagleX02
Age in Italy is always an integer


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-15 Thread lscrd
It depends on authors. I said that French people generally consider 0 as being 
neither positive nor negative. For instance, a positive temperature is above 
0°C.

For the french mathematician group Nicolas Bourbaki, which is a well known 
reference, zero is both positive and negative. But that not means that all 
mathematicians (being french or not) agree with this. I rather think that it is 
a non standard definition of positive (and negative). Bourbaki had certainly 
good reasons to do this, but I think it makes things more complicated. It’s 
better when the mathematical definitions are consistent with the common sense. 
And, in fact, I do not know of any other mathematicians who have adopted this 
point of view.

For Wikipedia in english – see 
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_real_numbers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive_real_numbers)
 – a positive number is clearly greater than zero and, this, from a 
mathematical point of view. But, even in English, your video shows that there 
is still discussion on this topic.


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-14 Thread Dippo
It makes me wonder who or what is correct. Because i can understand in computer 
math that 0 is positive. But if i must believe numberphile, 0 is neither 
positive or negative. See : 
[https://youtu.be/8t1TC-5OLdM?t=4m20s](https://youtu.be/8t1TC-5OLdM?t=4m20s)


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-13 Thread lscrd
Sorry, I’m French and for me positive means strictly positive (as negative 
means strictly negative), but to avoid any ambiguity, I always use « 
strictement positif » for numbers > 0 and « positif ou nul » for numbers ≥ 0.

Some authors (Bourbaki for instance) considers that zero is both a positive and 
a negative number. But these are exceptions (see Wikipedia on this topic).


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-12 Thread kobi
well, a baby whose age is less than 1 year old, wouldn't you count that as 0 
years? 


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-12 Thread massung
> no known man has a age of 9223372036854775807 years old!

While true, there are many things which have an age much greater than that of a 
human. The age of a building, country, civilization, planet, or even the age of 
the Universe. And, there are also physical "ages" which exceed even that of the 
range defined: the half-life of krypton-78 is 9.2e21 years. 


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-12 Thread Araq
I think the point is that we can easily change the intro example to something 
better. And I completely agree.


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-12 Thread mratsim
It also depends on your culture.

In French the equivalent of `positive` (positif) when used in math means 0 or 
more, otherwise we use strictly positive. This is different from English (or 
maybe just US).

Also in Asian countries, your age starts at 1 not 0 (and for some, or maybe it 
was in the past, you change age at the beginning of the year, i.e. legally 
everyone's birthday was on January 1st).

AFAIK airplanes didn't crash yet due to missed "birthday" maintenance ;).


Re: Natural is not positive

2019-06-11 Thread cantanima
Nim isn't the only language to define `Natural` and `Positive` in this way. Ada 
does the same thing, and that's the language people reputedly use to fly 
airplanes and run the train system. So the Nim devs can't be _entirely_ on the 
wrong track (no pun intended).

I guess your complaint is that `age` should not be of type `Natural`. That 
probably depends on what's needed in the application. Lots of people only ever 
display a natural number for their age.


Natural is not positive

2019-06-11 Thread oyster
here is the code on the [https://nim-lang.org](https://nim-lang.org)/

however, 


 = range 0..9223372036854775807(int)

Run

how do I know? Just assign a float to age. then nim refuse to compile.

so it is a very bad example

  1. the comment is wrong. btw, is there any builtin type which is true 
positive integer or float number?
  2. no known man has a age of 9223372036854775807 years old!




import strformat

type
  Person = object
name: string
age: Natural # ensures the age is positive


Run