> >-----Original Message----- > >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Arthur > > > >What was "creepy" - *I thought* - was the concept of > >mutable complex number as a type, in the same sense that any > >class is a type.
Just so that I am not accused of being disingenuous. That subject of primitive type was raised early in the discussion, but only intended in the context of the fact that Numeric arrays were prepared to except the immutable built-ins as complex numbers and unprepared to accept the custom class that was the same but mutable, as such. It presented a practical problem to me, and I was looking for practical solutions to it beyond the one had I been working with but found not fully satisfactory. But to repeat - The course of these discussions had some real practical value to me, having helped me come upon an idea for the implementation of the objects of the complex plane geometric objects that I think better reflects the ground of the mathematical ideas being explored, and with less of a performance trade-off. I could not want more, and I just hope I am not missing anything important by being excited about getting to the implementation. The small problem at the moment being the laptop on which I have my latest working version ain't taking well to getting powered up. ARGHHHH., Art _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
