Kevin Ryde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Bernard Urban <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> >> Is (/ 1 x) always equal to (/ x) in 1.7 ? >> This is actually my problem. It originates in the fact that hobbit >> converts (/ x) to (/ 1 x), and for x = 0, it fails for 1.6. > > You need to be clearer about what you're trying to report. > > If you're saying (/ 0) is not the same as (/ 1 0), then I see that's > the case. My guess would be that's wrong, probably both ought to give > errors (on the basis there's no multiplicative inverse of an exact
Page 20 of R5RS says: "This report recommends, but does not require, that the IEEE 32-bit and 64-bit floating point standards be followed..." Sot it is fine for guile to follow the standard (actually IEEE-754), which implies treatment of infinity and NAN. > zero). This is the case in the cvs head, perhaps it should be made so > in the 1.6 series too. > My argument is one of coherence, and I always believed coherence was in the spirit of scheme: guile> (/ 3) 0.333333333333333 guile> (/ 3.0) 0.333333333333333 guile> (/ 1 3) 0.333333333333333 guile> (/ 1 3.0) 0.333333333333333 guile> (/ 0) +#.# guile> (/ 0.0) +#.# guile> (/ 1 0) standard input:16:1: In procedure / in expression (/ 1 0): standard input:16:1: Numerical overflow ABORT: (numerical-overflow) guile> (/ 1 0.0) +#.# guile> -- Bernard Urban _______________________________________________ Bug-guile mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
