On 12/5/22 12:50 AM, John Cowan wrote:
Someone should cross-check division.txt against the SRFI text. to make
sure there are no other such accidental discrepancies. Special scrutiny
should be given to the "balanced" procedures, which are not present in
division.txt, but correspond to the R6RS div0, mod0, and div-and-mod0
procedures.
I'm not a great proofreader, but I compared the SRFI document to
Taylor's original.
Typos:
1. First paragraph of specification, change
"Each division operator pair is specified by defining the quotient q in
terms of the numerator a and the denominator n."
to
"Each division operator pair is specified by defining the quotient q in
terms of the numerator n and the denominator d."
2. In discussion of ceiling/, etc., change <numerator> to italic
"numerator".
3. In discussion of truncate/, etc., the sentence
However, by any non-unit denominator, the quotient of +1, 0, or -1 is
0; that is, three contiguous numerators by a common denominator share a
common quotient.
is clumsy at best, confusing at worst. Perhaps
With the truncate operator pair, the quotient of +1, 0, or -1 by any
non-unit denominator is 0; that is, three contiguous numerators divided
by a common denominator share a common quotient.
That's all I got.
Brad
