Hello Michaël,
>> - if the function & double stuff are separated ?
>> - for the double part, if variables can be double ?
>
> I just double-checked and could not see a clear use case mentioned in
> this thread for double return types,
Alas there is one: non uniform random functions which use a double
parameter.
Once random functions are there, the \setrandom horror code could be
removed, which would be a real benefit, IMO:-)
So I see a good case to have some support for doubles.
> so I would suggest focusing on the integer portion with min(), max(),
> abs(), debug() and the existing functions refactored. That's what your
> first versions did. If someone is wishing to implement double types,
> this someone could do it, the infrastructure that this patch puts in
> place has already proved that it can be easily extended.
Adding double is not too big a deal. I just stopped at variables because I
could not see any realistic use for them. My idea was to postpone that
till it is actually needed, "never" being the most probable course.
Now if this is a blocker for the committer, then I will probably make
the effort whatever I think of the usefulness of the feature.
--
Fabien.