Re: reading NaNs | Simplelists

arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (21 Oct 2005 14:53 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues John.Cowan (21 Oct 2005 15:59 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues bear (21 Oct 2005 16:39 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues John.Cowan (22 Oct 2005 02:03 UTC)

(missing)

(missing)

Re: +nan.0 problems bear (24 Oct 2005 06:04 UTC)

(missing)

(missing)

(missing)

(missing)

(missing)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (23 Oct 2005 20:24 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Oct 2005 20:30 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (23 Oct 2005 22:25 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Oct 2005 22:30 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (21 Oct 2005 17:15 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (21 Oct 2005 20:24 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (21 Oct 2005 20:32 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Alan Watson (22 Oct 2005 00:26 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (22 Oct 2005 00:45 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (22 Oct 2005 01:17 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (22 Oct 2005 01:22 UTC)

(missing)

(missing)

(missing)

(missing)

Re: arithmetic issues Bradley Lucier (23 Oct 2005 19:46 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (23 Oct 2005 20:10 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (23 Oct 2005 19:54 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Jens Axel Søgaard (23 Oct 2005 20:01 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (23 Oct 2005 20:50 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Oct 2005 21:12 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (23 Oct 2005 22:31 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Oct 2005 22:33 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (23 Oct 2005 22:50 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (23 Oct 2005 22:57 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 00:53 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (24 Oct 2005 01:05 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 01:45 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (24 Oct 2005 02:00 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 02:08 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (24 Oct 2005 02:14 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 02:27 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (24 Oct 2005 02:45 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Alan Watson (24 Oct 2005 02:13 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (24 Oct 2005 02:22 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Alan Watson (24 Oct 2005 03:19 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (24 Oct 2005 02:01 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Aubrey Jaffer (24 Oct 2005 02:27 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Alan Watson (24 Oct 2005 03:14 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues John.Cowan (24 Oct 2005 05:37 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Per Bothner (24 Oct 2005 07:05 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 07:58 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (24 Oct 2005 08:05 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Alan Watson (24 Oct 2005 08:25 UTC)

reading NaNs Aubrey Jaffer (24 Oct 2005 15:35 UTC)

Re: reading NaNs Per Bothner (24 Oct 2005 17:35 UTC)

Re: reading NaNs bear (24 Oct 2005 19:23 UTC)

Re: reading NaNs Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk (24 Oct 2005 18:17 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues bear (24 Oct 2005 06:13 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Taylor Campbell (24 Oct 2005 06:27 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (24 Oct 2005 07:49 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues bear (24 Oct 2005 16:41 UTC)

Re: arithmetic issues Thomas Bushnell BSG (24 Oct 2005 07:49 UTC)

Re: reading NaNs Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk 24 Oct 2005 18:17 UTC

Aubrey Jaffer <xxxxxx@alum.mit.edu> writes:

> We worked through this issue in SRFI-70.  I think SRFI-70's treatment
> is Schemely, compatible with IEEE-754, and doesn't unnecessarily
> constrain implementations:
>
>   The notation 0/0 is used within this report to designate a numerical
>   error-object.  A numerical function may return such an object when
>   no other number (including real infinities) is the correct value.
>   An implementation may report a violation of an implementation
>   restriction in any calculation for which the result would be 0/0.

It's not compatible with IEEE-754 because it doesn't guarantee that
by default operations like (/ 0.0 0.0) produce NaN.

--
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       xxxxxx@knm.org.pl
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/