Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Aristotle Pagaltzis- June 28, 2008 Mark J. Reed <markjreedmail.com> 2008-06-26 20:20:> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:31 PM, <mark.a.biggarcomcast.net> wrote:> > Most financial institutions don&39;t use float, rational or> > fixed point, they just keep integer pennies.> > I&39;m not so sure about that. There are lots of financial> transactions that deal in sub-$0.01 fractions: taxes, currency> conversion, brokerage stuff...They use decimal fixed point math where necessary.Regards,-- Aristotle..http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29329.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Wolfgang Laun- June 27, 2008 Larry Wall wrote:> but probably what the financial insitutions>want is special fixed-point types that assume a divisor anyway.>Would any financial institution care to comment> >Some (VAT tax) computations are defined, by law, to be executedwith a cetain precision. You have to be able to control the precisionat any point during a computation.The need for precision control may have a wider range. In theEGNOS project, they used to define data types, represented asbinary integers of.http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29328.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Moritz Lenz- June 27, 2008 Larry Wall wrote:> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:50:21PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:> : I assume that &39;Num&39; is meant to be a non-complex.> : Then it seems to make sense to assume:> : Int is Rat> : Rat is Num> : Num is Complex> : or am I off again> > Well, there&39;s this little thing called Liskov substitutability...> > Neither "is" nor "does" is quite right here, because the mathematicians> have seen fit to confuse representation...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29327.html Re: Type of literals by Daniel Ruoso- June 26, 2008 Qui, 2008-06-26 às 16:03 +0200, Moritz Lenz escreveu:> In the test suite there are some tests like this:> is(1.WHAT, &39;Int&39;, &39;1 as a literal is an Int);> This seems to imply that we guarantee the direct type of literals. But> do we> Actually I see no need for that. All my programs work fine if the> literal 1 is of type Foo, and Foo isa Int.> What&39;s our policy on that Will a 1.WHAT always return Int do we> guarantee (1..4).WHAT always to be...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29326.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Uri Guttman- June 26, 2008 >>>>> "RR" == Ryan Richter <ryantau.solarneutrino.net> writes: RR> On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:55:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote: >> We could go as far as to guarantee that Nums do rational arithmetic >> out to a certain point, but probably what the financial insitutions >> want is special fixed-point types that assume a divisor anyway. >> Would any financial institution care to comment RR> IANAFI, but I think that&39;s more or...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29325.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Mark J. Reed- June 26, 2008 On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 1:31 PM, <mark.a.biggarcomcast.net> wrote:> Most financial institutions don&39;t use float, rational or fixed point, they just keep integer pennies.I&39;m not so sure about that. There are lots of financial transactionsthat deal in sub-$0.01 fractions: taxes, currency conversion,brokerage stuff...-- Mark J. Reed <markjreedgmail.com>http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29324.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Larry Wall- June 26, 2008 On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:46:25AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:: the VM somehow sneaks in the appropriate conversion for us if we: actually try to pass an Int to a Rat.I&39;d point out that this is fundamentally the same decision point thatis reached when we want to do boxing, because we basically have int as Int num as Num complex as Complexto manage the representation change.Larryhttp://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29323.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by mark.a.biggar- June 26, 2008 Most financial institutions don&39;t use float, rational or fixed point, they just keep integer pennies.--Mark Biggarmarkbiggar.orgmark.a.biggarcomcast.netmbiggarpaypal.com -------------- Original message ----------------------From: Larry Wall <larrywall.org>> Would any financial institution care to comment> > Larryhttp://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29322.html Re: Type of literals by Larry Wall- June 26, 2008 On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 04:03:42PM +0200, Moritz Lenz wrote:: In the test suite there are some tests like this:: is(1.WHAT, &39;Int&39;, &39;1 as a literal is an Int);: : This seems to imply that we guarantee the direct type of literals. But: do we: : Actually I see no need for that. All my programs work fine if the: literal 1 is of type Foo, and Foo isa Int.: : What&39;s our policy on that Will a 1.WHAT always return Int do we: guarantee (1..4).WHAT always to be &39;Range&39;I don&39;t see...http://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29321.html Re: Rakudo test miscellanea by Ryan Richter- June 26, 2008 On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 09:55:09AM -0700, Larry Wall wrote:> We could go as far as to guarantee that Nums do rational arithmetic> out to a certain point, but probably what the financial insitutions> want is special fixed-point types that assume a divisor anyway.> Would any financial institution care to commentIANAFI, but I think that&39;s more or less right. I think they actuallytend to use BCD.http:www2.hursley.ibm.comdecimaldecifaq1.htmlinexact-ryanhttp://www.nntp.perl.org/group/perl.perl6.language/2008/06/msg29320.html |