Clay language

["Jérôme M. Berger"]

so wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Dec 2010 21:15:30 +0200, Jérôme M. Berger <jeberger at free.fr>
> wrote:
> 
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Many good examples do prove a ton though. Just off the top of my head:
>>>
>>> - complex numbers
>>     Multiplication and division are different from each other and from
>> addition and subtraction.
>>
>>> - checked integers
>>> - checked floating point numbers
>>> - ranged/constrained numbers
>>     More or less the same case, so I'm not sure that they make three.
>> Other than that agreed.
>>
>>> - big int
>>> - big float
>>> - matrices and vectors
>>> - dimensional analysis (SI units)
>>> - rational numbers
>>> - fixed-point numbers
>>     For all of those, multiplication and division are different from
>> each other and from addition and subtraction.
>>
>>     So what your examples do is actually prove *Steven's* point: most
>> of the time, the code is not shared between operators.
>>
>>         Jerome
> 
> First, most of these don't even have a division operator defined in math.

	?? The only type in this list without a division operator is vector
all the others have it.

> Second, you prove Andrei's point, not the other way around, since it
> makes the generic case easier, particular case harder.
> 
	I'm sorry? What do you call the "generic case" here? All this list
shows is that each operator needs to be implemented individually
anyway. Andrei's point was exactly the reverse: he claims that most
operators can be implemented in groups which clearly isn't the case
here.

		Jerome
-- 
mailto:jeberger at free.fr
http://jeberger.free.fr
Jabber: jeberger at jabber.fr

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20101230/58518cdf/attachment.pgp>