From ino-waiting@gmx.net  Tue May  9 18:50:11 2000
Received: from mout1.freenet.de (exim@mout1.freenet.de [194.97.50.132])
	by swi.psy.uva.nl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA28797
	for <prolog@swi.psy.uva.nl>; Tue, 9 May 2000 18:50:10 +0200 (MET DST)
From: ino-waiting@gmx.net
Received: from [194.97.50.136] (helo=mx3.freenet.de)
	by mout1.freenet.de with esmtp (Exim 3.14 #3)
	id 12pDDA-0006fn-00
	for prolog@swi.psy.uva.nl; Tue, 09 May 2000 18:50:20 +0200
Received: from [213.6.7.250] (helo=spotteswoode.de)
	by mx3.freenet.de with smtp (Exim 3.14 #3)
	id 12pDD8-0007sX-00
	for prolog@swi.psy.uva.nl; Tue, 09 May 2000 18:50:19 +0200
Received: (qmail 655 invoked by uid 0); 9 May 2000 16:49:50 -0000
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 18:49:50 +0200
To: prolog@swi.psy.uva.nl
Subject: Re: handling small numbers
Message-ID: <20000509184950.B624@spotteswoode.de>
Mail-Followup-To: prolog@swi.psy.uva.nl
References: <200005090143.NAA28932@atlas.otago.ac.nz> <Pine.LNX.3.91.1000509122129.16605B-100000@pdev.inet.co.za>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0.1i
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.91.1000509122129.16605B-100000@pdev.inet.co.za>; from paul@inet.co.za on Tue, May 09, 2000 at 02:22:50PM +0200
Organization: private

> Paul Sephton (Tue 09.0500-14:22):

> Would it not be more sensible to give the programmer the choice as to 
> whether he wants to use the exception mechanism to find out what the 
> reason was that the goal failed?  Perhaps under some circumstances, a 
> general failure is quite acceptible, whereas sometimes one needs to know 
> the precise nature of the failure.

couldn't the matter be settled by providing a "bigint" package in the
distribution?  everybody knows about the different qualities of native
floats and ints.  when i'm to make design decisions involving numbers, i
choose integers whenever possible, because integer arithmetic is well
defined, with no strings attached (except, maybe, for strange mod/3, where
you have to ask about signs...).  when i have to use floats, i make a few
checks as to what has to be considered (required precision, range,
rounding).  i'd be happy using a bigint package or one for rational numbers.
can't we swi-prolog folks just use the dec-10 .pl's?

other than that i vote for exceptions, because i trust my programs to
follow their design rules once they are debugged...  ha!

-- 
clemens                            (ino-waiting@gmx.net, pgp key available)

