Re: [pure-lang-users] Proposed syntax changes

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

Eddie Rucker wrote:
>> pow n::int (x%y)        |
>> pow n::bigint (x%y)     |
>> pow n::double (x%y)     = pow n (x/y);

Hmm, there's a reason that we have both ^ and pow, they're not the same. 
In Q, pow started out as a wrapper for the GMP bigint power function. 
The idea was to have a function that handles all the cases where exact 
powers can be computed. Unfortunately, when I ported that definition 
over to Pure, for some reason I decided that pow should also wrap the C 
pow function, maybe that was a mistake... I'll have to think about this.

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