From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Thread: a07f3367d7,421379614df5a9cd X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,public,usenet X-Google-NewGroupId: yes X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit Path: g2news2.google.com!news1.google.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!backlog2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.nethere.com!news.nethere.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 13:34:00 -0500 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: Range excluding 0.0 From: csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) Date: Sun, 30 Aug 2009 11:34:00 -0700 Message-ID: <1j59b2p.1yn55qm14nukavN%csampson@inetworld.net> References: <6f1ce89e-7889-4d58-b0f8-1945727f5149@f33g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <1j57hiw.vmezw81qexbi6N%csampson@inetworld.net> User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.2 (Mac OS X version 10.4.11 (PPC)) X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-3U9R1ZRPCEfY5fCLWTNxxJUmaMX4AoOLYA4+Dq5JRdVbEhP4y5i7Mf3uT6ZrHQtIT3AdlacOtPr+M/z!1T9aLmXfuQEZ5YfeZZnJ2HBHTJc6o+Kc48KXIePzkzhdTgMxEO/rC82KK1ktRzEQkvVfuFy3QfmF!7OpDGCorCCWdavo4GY+mDkL0tHIWTuI= X-Complaints-To: abuse@nethere.com X-DMCA-Complaints-To: abuse@nethere.net X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.39 X-Original-Bytes: 2073 Xref: g2news2.google.com comp.lang.ada:8061 Date: 2009-08-30T11:34:00-07:00 List-Id: Robert A Duff wrote: > > csampson@inetworld.net (me) writes: > > > This is not just theoretical musing. I currently work in the world > > of compasses, so a range of the form [0.0 .. 360.0) is quite natural. > > (That notation is neither mathematical nor Ada. I hope its meaning is > > clear.) > > It's certainly not Ada, but why do you say it's not mathematical? > I find it ugly, but I've certainly seen in maths textbooks. > Ignoring the ugly syntax, the concept seems quite useful. > Things might have changed since the days when I read math texts by the bushel, but in those days the notation would have been [0, 360). But, for the purpose of this sub-thread, who cares? As long as what I meant is understandable, I'm happy. Charlie -- All the world's a stage, and most of us are desperately unrehearsed. Sean O'Casey