<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2009/12/9 Hans Aberg <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:haberg@math.su.se">haberg@math.su.se</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
The rule that 'chuck' seems to use on explicit lists is to look at the first entry. If that number is without a decimal point, the list is of type int[], if has one, it is float[].<br></blockquote><div><br>Yes, and I agree this is at times inconvenient.<br>
<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
It would be easy to fix: look at all entries, and set it to int[] exactly when all numbers are without a decimal point.<br><br></blockquote><div><br>I disagree. I want it to be set to float when I tell it to be a float. I may want to use a list of numbers without decimals as a float. This may be because the numbers will later change, or because of member function overloading (for example with LiSa.rate() it matters a lot whether the argument is a float or int), or because I want divisions to work in a certain way.<br>
<br>As I see it array definitions are currently inconsistent with the implicit cast from int to float that we have elsewhere.<br><br>Yours,<br>Kas. <br></div></div>