On 4/14/06, Carl D. Sorensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > After reviewing what the scheme code would look like if we used complex > numbers, and thinking about the benefits of having nice names for data > types and procedures, I think I agree that we ought to have our own > coordinate pair type and functions. I couldn't find it as a supported > function in SRFI-*. I don't think we ought to use the term vector, > because scheme already has a defined vector type, which is not an R2 > vector. I'd recommend coordinate, point, or coordinate-pair.
I've started work implementing 2d vectors as SRFI-9 records. I don't have a great name, but I don't like point because vectors usually don't represent points. coordinate and coordinate-pair seem a little vague. How about vec or vec2? David _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
