Re: 2D vector code

[David Feuer]

On 4/14/06, Carl D. Sorensen <address@hidden> wrote:

>
> After reviewing what the scheme code would look like if we used complex
> numbers, and thinking about the benefits of having nice names for data
> types and procedures, I think I agree that we ought to have our own
> coordinate pair type and functions.  I couldn't find it as a supported
> function in SRFI-*.  I don't think we ought to use the term vector,
> because scheme already has a defined vector type, which is not an R2
> vector.  I'd recommend coordinate, point, or coordinate-pair.

I've started work implementing 2d vectors as SRFI-9 records.  I don't
have a great name, but I don't like point because vectors usually
don't represent points.  coordinate and coordinate-pair seem a little
vague.  How about vec or vec2?

David