WikiDiscuss

Rob:
> Okay. So should we learn to say times like:
> lijo'i pamu boi cize cu ca tcika
> instead of:
> li pamu pi'e cize ca tcika
> ?
>
> (And why in the world does jbofi'e require {cu} there?)

Because {ca} could be the beginning of a third operand for jo'i:
{ca gi pa gi re}. Presumably Robin's parser can do without {cu}
there.

> If pi'e cannot be a tuple, then times and dates would need to use jo'i.

CLL says that the base of each digit can be "vague", so times where
the digits after the decimal point are decimal seconds, and even dates
might still qualify, stretching the sense of base a bit. But we couldn't
use pi'e fore tuples of signed numbers, fractions or complex numbers.

> I think that using jo'i here is too wordy. I would prefer an alternate
> convention: {pi} is allowed inside a {pi'e} part, except that {pipi'e} is a
> mixed-base decimal point.

That could work.

> So my interpretation is that {pi'e} has been taken over to make a tuple, and
> that the way we can express numbers in large bases is with a pi'e-tuple.

I'm not convinced one way or the other at this point. Dates and times
are not definitory for me because they can be accomodated into the
base scheme, even if it's a bit of a stretch. Are there other interesting
uses for tuples that we would want to have covered by pi'e?

mu'o mi'e xorxes

__
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail