between and among: worth Phobosization?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>]

On Wednesday, 18 December 2013 at 19:47:05 UTC, Andrei 
Alexandrescu wrote:
> I don't think so. Algebraic properties have been derived from 
> desirable and useful properties and have long shown good 
> returns.

No, when you change the foundation/definitions some of the 
theorems will break. That always happens. I can't think of a 
single example where that does not happen.

Some theorems are more important to uphold than others, it is a 
good thing to avoid breaking DeMorgans for instance.

> Breaking algebraic properties based on ad-hoc arguments of 
> usefulness will guarantee the type won't work with many 
> standard algorithms (sort etc) and will never cease to surprise 
> its users.

Not sure what you mean by ad-hoc? It is so by definition? You are 
the one arguing for ad hoc… It does not make sense to turn to 
interval-algebra if you want 
range-like-ad-hoc-programmers-semantics? If you implement 
interval-algebra it should be… interval-algebra, and usable a 
such?