You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I have found myself dealing with unions of disjoint intervals sufficiently often that I feel it's about time I wrote a package for it. I think it's good for that to be a separate package from this, partially because unions of Interval are not closed, so my package will have its own union function that always returns the union type.
It quickly became clear to me that I'm going to need a union type which does not specify its openness via type parameters for anything in my package to be type stable (in particular even the containers could not be type stable for Interval). I've been calling this type GenericInterval{T} <: AbstractInterval{T}. Would there be any interest in me adding that to this package instead of putting it in my own?
As an aside, I'm self conscious of the whole DomainSets thing, and not super comfortable with what I'm doing, particularly as my implementation so far only supports unions of finitely many intervals, but I figure if I don't restrain myself I'm going to wind up spending 5 years writing a package that describes arbitrary sets on arbitrary manifolds of any dimension.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I have found myself dealing with unions of disjoint intervals sufficiently often that I feel it's about time I wrote a package for it. I think it's good for that to be a separate package from this, partially because unions of
Interval
are not closed, so my package will have its own union function that always returns the union type.It quickly became clear to me that I'm going to need a union type which does not specify its openness via type parameters for anything in my package to be type stable (in particular even the containers could not be type stable for
Interval
). I've been calling this typeGenericInterval{T} <: AbstractInterval{T}
. Would there be any interest in me adding that to this package instead of putting it in my own?As an aside, I'm self conscious of the whole
DomainSets
thing, and not super comfortable with what I'm doing, particularly as my implementation so far only supports unions of finitely many intervals, but I figure if I don't restrain myself I'm going to wind up spending 5 years writing a package that describes arbitrary sets on arbitrary manifolds of any dimension.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: