Nicholas Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> where it is possible to get "smart" when one arg is a "special case" of
>> the other.
>
>> And similarly numbers must be convertable to "complex long double" or
>> what ever is the top if the built-in tree ? (NV I guess - complex is
>> over-kill.)
>
>> It is the how do we do the generic case that worries me.
>
>Maybe this is a digression, but it does suggest that there may not
>be 1 top to the tree (at least for builtin numbers). Which may also hold
>for strings.
Which is why it worries me. If I invent a new number type (say),
what vtable entries must it have to allow all the generic things
to function? Given a choice between NV/UV/IV possibles on what basis do we
choose one branch over the other?
>
>> We old'ns need people that don't know "it can't be done" to tell us
>> how to do it - but we reserve the right to say "we tried that it didn't
>> work" too.
> ^ because
>
>Nicholas Clark
--
Nick Ing-Simmons <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Via, but not speaking for: Texas Instruments Ltd.
