[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: Alan Bawden <ALAN@MIT-MC>*Subject*: gaussian rationals, transcendental functions, etc.*From*: Scott E. Fahlman <Fahlman@CMU-CS-C>*Date*: Mon, 06 Jun 1983 00:00:00 -0000*Cc*: Common-Lisp@SU-AI*In-reply-to*: Msg of 5 Jun 1983 18:58 EDT from Alan Bawden <ALAN at MIT-MC>

If Fateman has a specific gripe or a specific proposal to make, he should make it. If his only proposal is that we should eliminate complex numbers from the language until we can find a REAL mathematician who understands this stuff, all I can say if that it is too late to consider such a sweeping change, and will just have to muddle through with the motley assortment of talent available on this list. If we make some sort of mistake this time around, we can always correct it later. The suggestion that numbers like #C(3/4 3.14159) be eliminated has a certain appeal. Would the proposal extend to eliminating numbers like #C(1.0S0 1.0L0)? Yes. There would be exactly as many types of complex number as there are types of floating point, plus the type in which both halves are rational. The COMPLEX function and other functions that create complex numbers would take any mixture of arguments and would do the usual foating-point contagion at creation time. -- Scott

- Prev by Date:
**gaussian rationals, transcendental functions, etc.** - Next by Date:
**Complex Arguments, fear and loathing on the number line.** - Previous by thread:
**gaussian rationals, transcendental functions, etc.** - Next by thread:
**Complex Arguments, fear and loathing on the number line.** - Index(es):