Re: [pure-lang-users] Numeric Arguments

[Albert G. <Dr....@t-...>]

Libor Spacek wrote:
> I was not really thinking about rationals and complex numbers and anything else yet.

Yes, but at least the rationals have to work, too.

> Here are my defs for ndiv and slash (new /). In practice, you could of course just add
> these extra cases to the existing definitions without using new symbols:

This will have to be so, since I don't want to have more division
operators in the library, unless there's a *really* compelling reason
for them.

> infixl 7 slash;
> x::int slash y::int = x div y if x mod y==0;
> x slash y = x/y;

A division operator which returns ints only if x divides y? I don't
think that this is a good idea, as you never know which type is
returned. The rationale behind / is precisely that you *always* get a
double result, same with '^'. That's the Algol philosophy and I think
it's good; I won't change it.

div/mod is another business; as long as they work consistently with the
integer div/mod and they cover all appropriate cases including rationals
I'm willing to add the extensions.

Albert

-- 
Dr. Albert Gr"af
Dept. of Music-Informatics, University of Mainz, Germany
Email:  Dr....@t-..., ag...@mu...
WWW:    http://www.musikinformatik.uni-mainz.de/ag