On 10/18/05, John.Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1) The #i and #e syntaxes do not use the numeric egg's redefined versions of > exact->inexact and inexact->exact properly. Thus #e5/2, #i5/2, and #e2.5 > all produce errors instead of 5/2, 2.5, and 5/2 respectively.
Thanks, i have fixed this in the reader: % darcs diff library.scm 2124,2125c2124,2125 < ((#\i) (##sys#read-char-0 port) (exact->inexact (r-number-with-radix))) < ((#\e) (##sys#read-char-0 port) (inexact->exact (r-number-with-radix))) --- > ((#\i) (##sys#read-char-0 port) > (##sys#exact->inexact (r-number-with-radix))) > ((#\e) (##sys#read-char-0 port) > (##sys#inexact->exact (r-number-with-radix))) > > 2) I think that using inexact->exact for #e<decimal> is not the Right Thing. > With the previous point fixed, #e5.2 would return > 5854679515581645/1125899906842624 > instead of 52/10 = 26/5. I'd rather see the latter, thus allowing exact > rationals to be written as decimal numbers. > Ok, I'll take a look. cheers, felix _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
