[Cuis-dev] Some un-accurate information on The Cuis Book

[Luciano Notarfrancesco]

Ken,
Looks good to me (although I didn’t oppose to your first change either!)

Thanks,
Luciano

On Mon, 27 Feb 2023 at 21:43 <ken.dickey at whidbey.com> wrote:

> Luciano,
>
> Thanks so much for this explination!
>
> I was looking for simplicity, but Complex "numbers" are not a kinds of
> Number and are not simple.
>
> I think some "Here be Dragons" text should be added to
> Complex>>real:imaginary:
>
> Perhaps something like the attached..
>
> How does this look to you?
>
> Thanks again,
> -KenD
> =====
> On 2023-02-27 03:09, Luciano Notarfrancesco via Cuis-dev wrote:
>
> > Hi Ken,
> > I don't have a strong opinion about Complex and I'm cool with either
> > option, specially because it's not in the base image and because I
> > don't really use the package. But for this kind of situation I tried
> > both approaches (reducing them or not), and in general I decided to not
> > reduce them. One of the reasons is that if you reduce them then you
> > might end up with a Number instead of an instance of Complex, and for
> > it to be consistent you'd have to implement the Complex protocol in
> > Number, or you might get a MNU. In fact I ended up implementing my own
> > "fractions" (that I call Rational) and they don't reduce to integers.
> > Another reason for doing it like this with fractions and other
> > "numbers" is to avoid ambiguities, for example I have the message
> > isUnit that returns true if the element has an inverse, and for example
> > the rational number 2/1 is a unit (the inverse is 1/2) but the integer
> > 2 is not a unit.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Luciano
> >
> > On Sun, 26 Feb 2023 at 20:48 ken.dickey--- via Cuis-dev
> > <cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st> wrote:
> >
> >> On 2023-02-26 05:31, ken.dickey--- via Cuis-dev wrote:
> >>
> >>> BTW, we can do better.  I think -4+0i above should be and print as
> >>> -4.
> >>
> >> Ah! The code is already there and just needed to be uncommented
> >> (attached).
> >>
> >> As we have Complex>>basicReal:imaginary: why does
> >> Complex>>real:imaginary not do the simplification?  Can we not just
> >> enable this?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> -KenD
> >> --
> >> Cuis-dev mailing list
> >> Cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st
> >> https://lists.cuis.st/mailman/listinfo/cuis-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20230227/ada849c1/attachment-0001.htm>