I think these protocols + generics should cover most such use cases, no?
On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 06:57 Jonathan Hull <jh...@gbis.com> wrote: > Shouldn’t “Number” be reserved for a foundation type similar to NSNumber? > Or would this protocol actually serve that purpose? > > I was planning to ask for a value type similar to NSNumber in phase 2. I > built one for my own code (a struct around an enum which can be Int, > Decimal, Rational, or Rational * π) and it is super useful for handling > things like user input where the value could be an Integer or > Float/Decimal, and I always want the highest precision until I ask for it > in a particular form. If it came in as an integer, I know I can present it > as an integer, and vice versa with decimal numbers. > > Sometimes it is nice to be able to say: “The user gave me a number” and > not really care about the underlying representation... > > Thanks, > Jon > > > > > On Jan 27, 2017, at 4:50 PM, Max Moiseev via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Renaming Arithmetic to Number (and having SignedNumber) might actually end > up being a win, since we need to provide SignedNumber to maintain source > code compatibility anyway. > > On Jan 27, 2017, at 8:34 AM, Xiaodi Wu via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > I'd always just assumed that Arithmetic was chosen so that > SignedArithmetic wouldn't clash with the old SignedNumber. If that's not an > issue, definitely agree that Number is the superior name. > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 08:30 T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Oh, I misread the arrows in that diagram and this makes much more sense > now. > > Thanks. > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 9:14 AM, Stephen Canon <sca...@apple.com> wrote: > > The bitwise stuff isn't on ArithMETic | ARITHmetic | Number | whatever. > > On Jan 27, 2017, at 9:13 AM, T.J. Usiyan via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > Regarding `Number` or `Numeric`: Does everything in Arithmetic apply to > complex numbers and do we want it to? The bitwise stuff is where I think > that there might be a mismatch. > > On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:26 PM, Dave Abrahams via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > on Sun Jan 15 2017, Stephen Canon <swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > Responding to the thread in general here, not so much any specific email: > > > > “Arithmetic” at present is not a mathematically-precise concept, and > > it may be a mistake to make it be one[1]; it’s a > > mathematically-slightly-fuzzy “number” protocol. > > > In that case, should we consider renaming it to “Numeric” or even > “Number?” That would at least remove the question about how to > pronounce it. > > > -- > -Dave > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > > _______________________________________________ > swift-evolution mailing list > swift-evolution@swift.org > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution > > >
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution