Re: infinities reformulated
Chongkai Zhu
(31 May 2005 07:17 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Aubrey Jaffer
(31 May 2005 23:47 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(02 Jun 2005 15:23 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Aubrey Jaffer
(02 Jun 2005 16:12 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(02 Jun 2005 16:16 UTC)
|
string->number
Aubrey Jaffer
(02 Jun 2005 19:10 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(02 Jun 2005 20:05 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
Aubrey Jaffer
(03 Jun 2005 01:59 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(03 Jun 2005 02:09 UTC)
|
Re: string->number Aubrey Jaffer (15 Jun 2005 21:10 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
Thomas Bushnell BSG
(16 Jun 2005 15:28 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
bear
(16 Jun 2005 16:59 UTC)
|
Re: string->number
Aubrey Jaffer
(17 Jun 2005 02:16 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
bear
(04 Jun 2005 16:42 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Aubrey Jaffer
(17 Jun 2005 02:22 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
bear
(19 Jun 2005 17:19 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
Aubrey Jaffer
(20 Jun 2005 03:10 UTC)
|
Re: infinities reformulated
bear
(20 Jun 2005 05:46 UTC)
|
precise-numbers
Aubrey Jaffer
(26 Jun 2005 01:50 UTC)
|
| From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <xxxxxx@becket.net> | Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 19:08:56 -0700 | | Aubrey Jaffer <xxxxxx@alum.mit.edu> writes: | | > | From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <xxxxxx@becket.net> | > | Date: Thu, 02 Jun 2005 13:05:29 -0700 | > | > ... My point is that inexact numbers correspond to real number | > neighborhoods; and hence have finite precision. | | Ok, that's fine. I agree completely with what you've said about | *inexact* numbers. | | ... I think that a Scheme implementation may also extend the nature | of an external representation if it wishes, provided it keeps | numbers separate from identifiers for all programs, in the right | way. | | In other words, an implementation can invent a new syntax, say #s, | where #sNNNN is the square root of NNNN, exact iff NNNN is. For a | great many of the standard operations of Scheme, this exactness can | be easily preserved with a straightforward implementation. I am having difficulty with inexact square-root numbers. The real numbers have a total ordering. So for any two real numbers x1 and x2, either x1 < x2, x1 > x2, or x1 = x2. #s2. splits the 1.4142135623730951 neighborhood into three parts; lets call them #s2.-, #s2., and #s2.+. Because "... it is the duty of each implementation to make the result as close as practical to the mathematically ideal result", 1.414213562373095048801689 must map to #s2., while 1.4142135623730951 maps to #s2.+. The split neighborhoods must be distinguished from each other because of the total ordering. But a floating-point representation has no additional bits to encode which side of which square-root any particular floating-point value is. Thus inexact square-root numbers and inexact floating-point representation are incompatible. | NUMBER->STRING must produce this representation, and STRING->NUMBER | must be able to handle it, and it should work the same as READ and in | program text. Such an extension is fully allowed by R5RS. | | If you argue that external representations for numbers CANNOT be | extended, then you can make no sense of the explicit statements in the | standard and the rationale for supporting exact numbers of just this | sort. Polar representation works because the polar coordinates of Real numbers are in one-to-one correspondence with the Real numbers. But one cannot casually add new inexact representations.