RE: 2D vector code

[Carl D. Sorensen]

David Feuer wrote:
---------------------------
The complex numbers form a field.  The 2-D vectors don't.  A complex
number suggests that the real and imaginary components are of a
different nature, whereas 2-D vectors are symmetrical in their
components.  Vectors could be implemented using complex numbers, but I
think identifying them is ugly.

Carl here:

After reviewing what the scheme code would look like if we used complex
numbers, and thinking about the benefits of having nice names for data
types and procedures, I think I agree that we ought to have our own
coordinate pair type and functions.  I couldn't find it as a supported
function in SRFI-*.  I don't think we ought to use the term vector,
because scheme already has a defined vector type, which is not an R2
vector.  I'd recommend coordinate, point, or coordinate-pair.

Carl