Sean T Allen

Is there a reason to tie these different packages together? Would there be something we lose by discussing each individually?

@rhagenson if these aren't tried to one another, I think that an RFC for each would be good. I would focus on adding support for things like Complex numbers, Rational...

> Would me switching this to a draft PR prevent the discuss during sync label from being reapplied? No. See https://github.com/ponylang/rfcs/blob/main/.github/workflows/add-discuss-during-sync.yml#L3 for events that cause the label to be added.

I'm in favor of breaking this apart into different RFCs.

I find this RFC very confusing as written. I don't understand what large sections are attempting to convey. I think I'm going to need someone to walk me through it...

I'd like to see this broken apart further into an RFC for where Rational and Complex fit with the existing numerics hierarchy and a separate discussion of the best way...

@aturley @jtfmumm @jemc @sylvanc feedback?

@jemc the code is a pony version of the problem from the referenced paper where its discussed. i'm not sure comments would make much of a difference outside of that...

Hi @sblessing, We have an RFC process for additions and changes to the language and standard library. see https://github.com/ponylang/rfcs/

@jemc I think `addc` et al are rather hidden. I think at minimum that a FAQ entry, Pony pattern or highlighting in the tutorial is in order. Thoughts?