|
Wrapping up SRFI-70
Aubrey Jaffer
(10 Aug 2005 03:16 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Bradley Lucier
(10 Aug 2005 03:31 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70 Per Bothner (10 Aug 2005 05:13 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Aubrey Jaffer
(15 Aug 2005 02:18 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Per Bothner
(15 Aug 2005 16:38 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Aubrey Jaffer
(18 Aug 2005 01:58 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Per Bothner
(23 Aug 2005 00:24 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
bear
(10 Aug 2005 05:38 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Aubrey Jaffer
(15 Aug 2005 03:45 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
bear
(17 Aug 2005 03:06 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Paul Schlie
(17 Aug 2005 14:56 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
bear
(17 Aug 2005 17:00 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
Aubrey Jaffer
(19 Aug 2005 01:26 UTC)
|
|
Re: Wrapping up SRFI-70
bear
(19 Aug 2005 18:28 UTC)
|
Bradley Lucier wrote: > > On Aug 9, 2005, at 10:08 PM, Aubrey Jaffer wrote: > >> Its time to wrap up SRFI-70. > > > I suggest withdrawal. I doubt anyone except you will implement it. I > think it's confused and misguided, I think there are some good things here, but there may be too much stuff in one SRFI. I think extending quotient, remainder, and modulo to real numbers is a reasonable proposal: There is prior art in both Common Lisp and some Scheme implementations (including Kawa). However, I think it's a separate issue from one dealing with infinities. The round->exact, ceiling->exact, floor->exact, and truncate->exact may be reasonable assitions (I tend to think so) but again I think that should be a seperate SRFI. An SRFI dealing with inexact infinities should I think focus more on IEEE infinities. It is desirable that a Scheme implementation can map (possibly compile) Scheme arithmetic on inexact reals into IEEE floating-point arithmetic. I think more dicussion of this issue is needed. -- --Per Bothner xxxxxx@bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
