- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 17:17:02 -0500
- To: Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net>
- Cc: www-style list <www-style@w3.org>
On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 4:04 PM, Anton Prowse <prowse@moonhenge.net> >> wrote: >>> >>> is, pedantically speaking, incorrect since "-0" is not an integer; and >>> more importantly, from the following: >> >> Why is -0 not an integer? > > Because the set of integers is precisely ...,-2,-1,0,1,2,... and its > elements do not have aliases. Anne already answered you with a quote, but more directly, what do you mean "its elements do not have aliases". -0 is definitely an integer equivalent to 0. 0 is the only number with multiple representations in the integers. ~TJ
Received on Tuesday, 20 October 2009 22:17:54 UTC