On Tue, 2009-01-13 at 14:04 -0500, Patrick Durusau wrote:
<snip>
> That would require saying that violation of value types for input or
> output of any function results in an error.
>
> Is that a desirable result?
This is surely _not_ a desirable result (if we want to continue
traditional behaviour) unless we change most function definitions:
frequently when I argument is supposed to be an Integer but an
non-Integer number is given, implementations perform a conversion
(frequently a truncation, sometimes a rounding). We surely do not want
to force an error unless we change all definitions to accept arbitrary
numbers and specify the conversion to be used. Of course in the spirit
of interoperability we really should do the latter.
Andreas
--
Andreas J Guelzow <>
Concordia University College of Alberta
