William D Clinger scripsit:

> > 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.

True enough.  However, there are legitimate reasons for not wanting
flonums if the hardware doesn't give you them for free.  In 32 years
of programming I have never used flonums in anger, except in languages
where they are the only kind of numbers on offer.

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

I'm not proposing a change here, just making a background inquiry.

--
My confusion is rapidly waxing          John Cowan
For XML Schema's too taxing:            xxxxxx@ccil.org
    I'd use DTDs                        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    If they had local trees --
I think I best switch to RELAX NG.