Re: implementation categories, exact rationals
Aubrey Jaffer 17 Oct 2005 21:59 UTC
| From: Michael Sperber <xxxxxx@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de>
| Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 21:44:10 -1000
|
| Aubrey Jaffer <xxxxxx@alum.mit.edu> writes:
|
| > What is the rationale for mandating exact rationals?
|
| This (from the SRFI document):
|
| > Under R5RS, it is hard to write programs whose arithmetic is
| > portable across the above categories, and it is unnecessarily
| > difficult even to write programs whose arithmetic is portable
| > between different implementations in the same category.
|
| > The portability problems can most easily be solved by requiring
| > all implementations to support the full numeric tower.
Easy for who?
Implementing exact non-integers for SCM and Guile would take a lot of
work.
"Most easily", and also less confusing for users, would be to remove
exact non-integers from the language.