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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fd63afa4dc364b7e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-03-21 05:32:21 PST Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Path: supernews.google.com!sn-xit-02!supernews.com!news.gv.tsc.tdk.com!news.iac.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!europa.netcrusader.net!208.184.7.66!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!portc03.blue.aol.com!uunet!dca.uu.net!ash.uu.net!world!bobduff From: Robert A Duff Subject: Re: Static typing (Was Re: Better support for garbage collection) Sender: bobduff@world.std.com (Robert A Duff) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 13:28:55 GMT References: <98m938$2iod0$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de><98pgs1$32up7$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> <98umc6$39coj$1@ID-25716.news.dfncis.de> Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34 Xref: supernews.google.com comp.lang.ada:5963 Date: 2001-03-21T13:28:55+00:00 List-Id: "Ken Garlington" writes: > Can't see why, since the terms "rational number" and "floating-point number" > are not the same. I think I'd be much more bothered by a floating-point > number without a (floating) point! Well, as it happens, "one half" is both a rational and (on most machines) a floating point number. Not to mention a fixed point number. ;-) - Bob