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

Re: Unifying the two generic arithmetic alternatives



Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk scripsit:

> Andrew Wilcox <awilcox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > To take an example of [Egner et al. 2004], (< x y) in this proposal
> > returns an *inexact* boolean, if either X or Y is inexact.
> 
> A boolean is almost always used to choose control flow. Since you
> can't make control flow inexact, inexactness is not really contagious.
> It can't be. Inexact booleans don't add any real value.

Indeed, even without control flow as such the idea is bizarre.  If
x and y are inexact numbers, is the value of (if (< x y) "foo" "bar") an
inexact string?

-- 
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis vom dies!    John Cowan <jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,     http://www.reutershealth.com      
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,              http://www.ccil.org/~cowan  
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)