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

Re: reading NaNs

Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>> To the contrary, I think requesting *any* model should be explicit.
>>>
>>> Can you help me out here by explaining *why* it is so painful to be
>>> explicit?
>>
>> Because I see no sane way of *switching* models. They shouldn't be
>> changed, they should be added (adding new numeric types, extending
>> existing operations - not replacing).
>
> Who spoke of switching models?

So how would you support IEEE and non-IEEE inexact reals at the same
time? Which of them would the syntax like "3.14" resolve to?

-- 
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/