<div dir="ltr">On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 11:47 PM, Guillaume Lessard via swift-evolution <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" target="_blank">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class=""><br>
> On May 23, 2017, at 19:55, Xiaodi Wu <<a href="mailto:xiaodi.wu@gmail.com">xiaodi.wu@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Guillaume Lessard via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
</span><span class="">> /// Truncating the fractional part of `source` is equivalent to rounding<br>
> /// toward zero.<br>
><br>
</span><span class="">> You are quite right; this is still there, and I didn't see it! Well, let's fix that.<br>
<br>
</span>Meanwhile, in the real world, truncation of a number or a series means reducing its precision. Of a floating point number, it’s removing the fractional part. Exactly the use you want to suppress. Why in the world do you insist that it must be redefined to be something else?</blockquote><div><br></div><div>Let's be clear: this has nothing to do with what I want or like. This decision was made previously, by other people. I am simply telling you what it is and helping to ensure that it is consistently implemented. If you were to go back into the archives, you'd see that I rather liked the familiar names. But the time for debating that is over. Someone else's arguments carried the day. We move on.</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Must Swift be incomprehensible to the uninitiated?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Come on. "Rounding toward zero" is comprehensible to anyone. But again, the decision has been made.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>