"Mikael Djurfeldt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Good idea.
I made the change. > Because of paragraph 6.2.2, a program cannot expect to get > the result 0.0, and it seems like a strength of the implementation to > provide the additional piece of information that the result is indeed > *exactly* 0. If you wanted an argument the other way, returning a flonum zero could give negative zero for say "(* 0 -1.0)". But I'd favour exactness, since the result is certainly exactly zero. > (Not entirely sure that the common zero is a good idea, but I tend > to think so.) I suppose it's a question of whether "*" should do that, or leave it up to the application. The only case I can think of where a common zero may not be good is with matrices, where "(* 0 matrix) => matrix" could preserve the dimensions of the input matrix in the output matrix. Those dimensions could be used later "(* matrix matrix)", to signal an error if the dimensions were incompatible. _______________________________________________ Bug-guile mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guile
