> On 13.09.2019, at 08:50, Fabio Niephaus <lists at fniephaus.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> On Thu, 12 Sep 2019 at 1:02 am, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> "An Interval reversed is generally an Interval, except when made of Float."
> Should ReversedInterval be renamed to ReversedFloatInterval then?
> 
> +1
> 
> Interval was designed for Integers only.  IMO, it should be copied to a separate class, FloatInterval, to implement this capability.
> 
> Does anyone actually need Float support in Interval at this point? Or would it make sense to just disallow Floats in Interval for the time being?
> 

I don't see why supporting

	2.4 to: 4.5

would be a bad idea. At least, it has a proper mathematical meaning.
Question is, whether just

	(1.0 to: 3.0) includes: 2.5 

should be true or also

	(1 to: 3) includes: 2.5

:D

> Fabio
> 
> 
>  
> 
> Nonetheless, this seems to fix #testIntervalOfFloatLast and
> #testIntervalOfFloatReversed of IntervalTest. Do we want to integrate
> this proposal or shall we mark these two tests as expected failures?
> 
> Fabio
> 
> 
>