>> Rats. I'll try to look at libguile/numbers.c soon. > Any news on that? :-)
No -- sorry -- my TODO list is so long, even emacs complains. (There's a problem: the scheme spec seems to insist on the "simplest" ratio which they define in terms of the size of the integers -- my rationalize used continued fractions so it's fast (worst case involves successive fibonacci numbers, I think), but it's not always "simplest". I think the scheme spec is silly -- this reminds me of (random 0.0) in CL which is flagged as an error -- obviously CL-types have no idea why you'd use random, and similarly for rationalize in scheme).
