Re: [Haskell-cafe] Why does the class called "Real" support only rationals, and not all reals?

On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, bretm wrote:

Henning Thielemann wrote:

...

Is your approach more like symbolic calculation or more like a representation for computable reals?

http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Applications_and_libraries/Mathematics#Nu...

Computable reals, specifically continued fraction representation. I know I'm reinventing the wheel here

Jan Skibinski did it for Haskell, too.

(I was using an OCaml implementation called ContFrac as a guide to the algorithms) but I'm just playing with this as a vehicle for learning Haskell.

If you plan to use NumericPrelude, I'll glad to hear experiences about the usefulness of the NumericPrelude class hierarchy, and we could add it to that library.