Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Why does the class called Real support only rationals, and not all reals?

2007-06-05 Thread Henning Thielemann

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Dan Piponi wrote:

 On 6/4/07, DavidA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  Yes, I'm afraid that you are understanding correctly. Annoying isn't it.
 
  It is well-known (among Haskell mathematicians at least) that the numeric 
  type
  classes in the prelude are broken.

 A few days ago I found myself forced to write:

  instance Floating Fixed where ...

 where 'Fixed' is a fixed point arithmetic class! :-)

 When you find yourself having to make a type an instance of the
 complete 'opposite' class you know you have serious problems!

Indeed. The corresponding class is called Transcendental in
NumericPrelude. (And FixedPoint is an instance of it.)
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


[Haskell-cafe] Re: Why does the class called Real support only rationals, and not all reals?

2007-06-04 Thread DavidA
Yes, I'm afraid that you are understanding correctly. Annoying isn't it.

It is well-known (among Haskell mathematicians at least) that the numeric type 
classes in the prelude are broken.

Here's one proposal for a small step in the right direction:
http://hackage.haskell.org/trac/haskell-prime/ticket/112

But it really needs a mathematician to sit down and sort it out properly.


___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe


Re: [Haskell-cafe] Re: Why does the class called Real support only rationals, and not all reals?

2007-06-04 Thread Dan Piponi

On 6/4/07, DavidA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Yes, I'm afraid that you are understanding correctly. Annoying isn't it.

It is well-known (among Haskell mathematicians at least) that the numeric type
classes in the prelude are broken.


A few days ago I found myself forced to write:


instance Floating Fixed where ...


where 'Fixed' is a fixed point arithmetic class! :-)

When you find yourself having to make a type an instance of the
complete 'opposite' class you know you have serious problems!
--
Dan
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe