Re: [jboske] RE: [lojban] djedi li integer

["Jorge Llambias" <jjllambias@hotmail.com>]

la djan cusku di'e

> And Rosta scripsit:
>
> > I wonder if {su'o pi no} and {su'o pi su'o} could be given special
> > meanings of '[some] integer' and '[some] rational' respectively. Do they 
> have
> > other more useful meanings?
>
> I think using "su'o" is problematic, basically because of the very strong
> default that su'o cannot mean 0 (unless there is an explicit negative
> value following). So nopino seems like an improper value for su'opino,
> yet 0 is a good integer.

I don't see anything at all problematic about {su'opino}, it just
means "at least .0", i.e. any positive real or zero. I would not
take anything involving {pi} as an integer. Even {pa pi no} is a
real which just happens to be an integer, but it would be a value
to be used in a context where reals make sense. (So not as a
regular quantifier.)

In any case, {su'o} is not a digit, so taking {su'o pi no} to
mean "something point zero" makes no sense to me.

> I propose tu'opino instead.

I wouldn't take {tu'o} as a digit either, but as I said
{pi no} screams real, not integer. I would suggest {pinai}
to signal integers, if {nai} was in UI:

papi = 1 as a real = 1.0
papinai = 1 as an integer.

mu'o mi'e xorxes



_________________________________________________________________
Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN. 
http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/default.asp