Re: numerical conditioning MAGNITUDE and / William D Clinger (21 Jun 2006 14:11 UTC)
Re: numerical conditioning MAGNITUDE and / John Cowan (21 Jun 2006 14:30 UTC)

Re: numerical conditioning MAGNITUDE and / William D Clinger 21 Jun 2006 14:11 UTC

John Cowan wrote:
> AFAICT the minimum set of flonums required by the
> SRFI is {0.0}.

I suspect you're right.

AFAICT the minimal R5RS requirement for the number of pairs
that can be created before overflowing the heap is 0.

I guess it's time to incant "quality of implementation" [1].

Will

[1] http://lists.tunes.org/archives/gclist/1996-April/000520.html