On the creation of a new nonnegative and unnatural integer type.
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Feb 28, 2014
- 1762 views
mattlewis said...
It's meant to be a natural number. Interestingly, I see it is defined in several places (and slightly differently) in the standard library. Those should probably be combined, although they are currently local types.
These types are all functionally the same - the set of nonnegative integers.
If we're going to unify these types, then maybe we should change the name of the type as well. "Natural number" is an ambiguous term (it's not clear if it should include zero, as we do, or if it should follow the traditional form of being only the positive integers). Creating a new "nonnegnative" type would be much clear IMNSHO.
