Jerzy Karczmarczuk wrote:
[snip]
> I remind you that there is still an uncorrected bug in the domain of
> rationals (at least in Hugs, but I believe that also elsewhere, since
> this is a plain Haskell bug in the Prelude).
>
> succ (3%2)
>
> gives 2%1.
Yes, this is also loony. succ should either give the least greater value
(in which case it can't be defined for rationals but can and be useful for
floats) or the value+1.
[snip]
> My permanent, constant suggestion: revise all the numeric classes
> very thoroughly. Beginning at the beginning.
If there isn't time for this I recommend hefty use of the DELETE key
until time can be found to get it right.
Challenge: can anyone think of a problem in Numerical Analysis where
Haskell's current definition of [a,b..c] for a,b,c floats actually is the
most efficient way of proceeding? I can't.
