From: "Peter I. Hansen" <pih@oek.dk>
Subject: Re: Natural data type ?
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2002 17:45:29 +0100
Date: 2002-03-28T17:45:29+01:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3CA348A9.5000506@oek.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: a7skp1$cee$1@nh.pace.co.uk
Marin David Condic wrote:
>I've often wondered this myself. What Ada calls "Natural" numbers are what
>used to be called "Whole" numbers when I was learning The New Math. What Ada
>calls "Positive" would have been called "Natural" back then too. I don't
>know if this is some version of "The All New And More Improved Math" or if
>it was just some mistake that got institutionalized & now we're stuck with
>it.
>
>The secret is not to take the names too seriously - just understand what
>they give you and work with it...
>
>MDC
>
Yes, I'll just work with it. It dosn't make any difference to me. I just
wondered :)
/Peter
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-03-28 16:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-03-27 2:13 Natural data type ? Peter I. Hansen
2002-03-27 2:57 ` Chad R. Meiners
2002-03-27 23:18 ` Peter I. Hansen
2002-03-28 3:55 ` Chad R. Meiners
2002-03-28 15:40 ` Marin David Condic
2002-03-28 16:47 ` Peter I. Hansen
2002-03-27 14:25 ` Marin David Condic
2002-03-28 16:45 ` Peter I. Hansen [this message]
2002-03-28 16:30 ` Georg Bauhaus
2002-03-28 16:42 ` Peter I. Hansen
2002-03-28 18:33 ` Darren New
2002-03-29 16:19 ` Georg Bauhaus
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox