Suitable new name for Dimensional library

[Henning Thielemann]

On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Björn Buckwalter wrote:

> Secondly, I feel that "Dimensional" is to vague and ambiguous, in
> particular it could just as well refer to dimensions in the linear
> algebra sense as physical dimensions. I'd like a more specific and
> perhaps less pretentious name for the library. This is where I would
> appreciate some feedback as to what would be appropriate. Some
> suggestions are:
>
>  - Numeric.Units
>  - Numeric.PhysicalUnits
>  - Numeric.PhysicalDimensions
>  - Numeric.SI
>  - Numeric.SIUnits
>  - Numeric.Units.Static

It's certainly a good idea to distinguish between static and dynamic 
implementations. Incidentally, my implementation of numbers with units 
uses dynamic unit checking. It is also implemented in a generic way for 
any unit system, but has a specialisation for SI units. Currently it does 
not adhere to standard top-level module names (which are these and why?) 
but this could be changed.

I use:

Number/Physical.hs
Number/Physical/Read.hs
Number/Physical/Show.hs
Number/Physical/Unit.hs
Number/Physical/UnitDatabase.hs
Number/SI.hs
Number/SI/Unit.hs

To be compatible with your library, the module names should contain some 
hint to their dynamic nature.


See:
   http://darcs.haskell.org/numericprelude/src/Number/