On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 06:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
Steven Devijver <steven.devij...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8 jun, 05:47, Daniel <doubleagen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > These notation arguments are compelling.
> >
>
> I'm not convinced. The notation would only work for literals, and how
> often would one write literal complex numbers?
>
> For non-literals the notation would need to support this:
>
> (* (my-complicated-algo x)+(my-other-complicated-algo y)i (another-
> algo z)i)
Why? It isn't supported for rationals or exponents. Or are you
claiming that because we support "3/4" we should also support
(* (my-complicated-algo val)/(my-other-complicated-algo exp)
1/(another-complicated-algo exp2))
with similar problems because we support "1e3"?
<mike
--
Mike Meyer <m...@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html
Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information.
O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
