I can think of a lot more basic types that we could add to Python that would make as much sense as currencies: pixels, points, geometric figures, (audio) samples, images, ... But: aren't we really trying to standardise interfaces? The main benefit of a basic currency type would be that it defines the set of operations allowed on it (add, subtract are fine, divide gives a normal number, multiply isn't allowed) much more than code sharing. Note that I do think standardised interfaces would be a great thing, and if there was a common Python "pixel" interface that would free up quite a lot of my brain cells that are now used for remembering the 4 or 5 different pixel interfaces that I use regularly, but I'm not sure that a standard Python pixel type is the solution. -- - Jack Jansen <Jack.Jansen@oratrix.com> http://www.cwi.nl/~jack - - If I can't dance I don't want to be part of your revolution -- Emma Goldman -
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4