Why not FP for Money?

[Alex Martelli]

Bengt Richter <bokr at oz.net> wrote:
   ...
> ISTM maybe decimal _literals_ should be represented internally _exactly_,
> and exactness be preserved in results of expressions involving only
> literals with +-*/ operations.

IOW, you think that *decimal _literals_* should actually be *rationals*,
and this new type 'rational' should be used only internally for
computation between decimal literals, not otherwise made available to
the user, e.g. for I/O...?  If we go to the trouble of introducing a
rational type, why not make it explicitly available to the user then?


Alex