Talk:Quaternion type: Difference between revisions

Line 103:
: Another issue is that traditionally programming languages have been thought of as abstractions representing sequences of computer instructions ([some examples of] type theory[s], for example), or abstractions representing "core mechanisms" (scoping rules, for example). There has been some work based on modeling hardware behavior using mathematical concepts (array theory, for example), but that's not where most communities focus their energy.
: There are lots of infinities here and unless we are careful the computing platform will get bogged down, spending a bulk of the computational time on unnecessary issues. As an example, consider whether we should have a hermetian basis for quaternions or whether octonions are acceptable as an implementation of quaternions. Since we are people, and since we are smart, we have a concept of simplicity which kicks in when we understand something, but computers do not have that. [But this also means that if it seems complicated we do not understand it.] --[[User:Rdm|Rdm]] ([[User talk:Rdm|talk]]) 17:16, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 
:You may consider [http://www.gap-system.org/ GAP]. [[User:Arbautjc|Arbautjc]] ([[User talk:Arbautjc|talk]]) 19:46, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Anonymous user