Talk:Quaternion type: Difference between revisions
→Imaginary parts (plural)
m (→Imaginary parts (plural): how would imag be used?) |
|||
Line 113:
::Hi, Looking through the function names are came across image. It just seemed wrong to access only one of the three imaginary parts of a quaternion via that name - especially when the other imaginary parts seem to be adjacent indices away.
::Why the use of the name? What would imag be used for? It seems odd to single out I over j over k in such a way. --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 18:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
: Paddy3118 - I don't doubt your good intentions, but there is nothing "wrong" or even misleading about the Julia entry. (I am not part of the Julia team, but I do have extensive training in mathematics.)
: First, the Julia entry plainly states that the code is part of the Julia library. It is helpful to see the code as a whole -- that's what this website is all about! Second, as rdm pointed out, since the library (taken as a whole) can be used to solve the assigned problems completely and accurately, it seems unnecessary and unwise to flag irrelevant details about naming as needing attention, letting alone claiming they are "incorrect". Third, the bit that offends you makes no claim that "imag(.)" returns all the imaginary parts -- indeed that would probably not even be desirable.
: You might say that since the Julia library that provides real(_) it ought to provide accessor functions for each of the imaginary components, but that should perhaps be the subject of discussion between you and the good people at Julia. I've checked the most recent Julia library, and the same accessor functions ("real" and "imag") are still defined there. The choice of the name "imag" for the "i" component has four letters, just like "real", and is really unobjectionable. [[User:Peak|Peak]] ([[User talk:Peak|talk]]) 19:28, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
| |||