On Oct 7, 2011, at 6:07 AM, Sébastien Brisard <sebastien.bris...@m4x.org> wrote:
>>
>> +1 to add both of these, though I would suggest one of the following
>> pairs of names:
>> 0) negate, invert
>> 1) opposite, reciprocal
>> 2) additiveInverse, multiplicativeInverse
>>
>> Probably 2) is clearest, but a bit long. I am fine with any of them.
>>
>> Phil
>>
> Hi,
> I've created MATH-686 which relates to this proposal. However looking
> at what's already implemented in the CM library, I found that the best
> (unsatisfactory) option would be negate()/reciprocal() -- see the
> ticket. Native english speakers will probably not like that! Are we
> really that unhappy with this?
Not worth a long argument, but the reciprocal of a fraction is not exactly the
same concept as multiplicative inverse in a field. I would be happier about
living with that inconsistency than adding another noun/verb inconsistency in
the same class.
Phil
> Sébastien
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
