Email list hosting service & mailing list manager

Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (28 Nov 2022 16:38 UTC)
Fwd: Proposed document change Arthur A. Gleckler (28 Nov 2022 20:00 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell (29 Nov 2022 04:27 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (29 Nov 2022 16:45 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell (29 Nov 2022 18:05 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (29 Nov 2022 18:26 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (29 Nov 2022 18:39 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell (29 Nov 2022 18:39 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Arthur A. Gleckler (29 Nov 2022 22:45 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (01 Dec 2022 14:49 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (01 Dec 2022 21:30 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Arthur A. Gleckler (01 Dec 2022 21:33 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change John Cowan (05 Dec 2022 05:50 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Arthur A. Gleckler (05 Dec 2022 22:52 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (06 Dec 2022 18:52 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change John Cowan (07 Dec 2022 02:11 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (07 Dec 2022 16:04 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Arthur A. Gleckler (07 Dec 2022 17:14 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell (01 Dec 2022 22:09 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Bradley Lucier (03 Dec 2022 17:26 UTC)
Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell (04 Dec 2022 17:27 UTC)

Re: Fwd: Proposed document change Taylor R Campbell 29 Nov 2022 18:02 UTC

> Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2022 11:44:52 -0500
> From: Bradley Lucier <xxxxxx@math.purdue.edu>
> References: <xxxxxx@jupiter.mumble.net>
>
> On 11/28/22 9:59 PM, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>
> > These 1440 test cases cover zero, units, primes, a square, a composite
> > of distinct primes, and a cube.  (They don't, however, cover anything
> > that requires bignum arithmetic.)  I haven't vetted these answers in
> > any way other than verifying the tests pass in MIT Scheme -- I
> > recommend running them through the property tests, and eyeballing them
> > to spot-check for reasonableness.
>
> Thanks, I'll use this idea.  (There's also the balanced/ family.)

I forgot about that one.  MIT Scheme doesn't have it yet.  I guess
making test cases for it is left as an exercise for the reader!

(If you do, I can add it to MIT Scheme and verify it passes the
test cases.)