Re: lojban as a programming language [was Re: [lojban] Lojban for lay programmers]

[John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>]

Brook Conner wrote:


> (mathematically speaking, IEEE floating point numbers are none of these, 
> are not even a group (I don't think NaN has an additive inverse, and Inf 
> has very peculiar behavior)).


The additive inverse of NaN is NaN, I think, depending on your
definition of inverse: NaN + NaN is not 0, but 0 - NaN is definitely
NaN.

As for not being a group, if they weren't a group over the defined
IEEE operations, that would mean that something not an IEEE-float
was being delivered, which is self-contradictory, since every
bit combination has an IEEE meaning.


> Another problem of semantics is choosing the subset of the vocabulary 
> and making sure the user knows what it is. Are you going for an 
> imperative model? Lots of "ko" running around.


"ko" can be defaulted, though, if that's a convention established
between speaker and listener.

--
Not to perambulate || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
the corridors || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
in the boots of ascension. \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel