Michael Sperber scripsit: > I don't recall the inexact argument.
:-) > I didn't consciously change anything in R6RS that might make it > different from R5RS. Except to require arbitrarily large exact rationals (and a fortiori integers, though integers are particularly mentioned). > However, I did try to do something about the whole broken concept of > "inexact numbers": I read that paper some years back. I'll re-review it now. > Albeit, to no avail. Nothing is ever quite useless, for the stone which the builders rejected may become the cornerstone. (Psalm 118 verse 22) -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan co...@ccil.org Is not a patron, my Lord [Chesterfield], one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and when he has reached ground encumbers him with help? --Samuel Johnson _______________________________________________ r6rs-discuss mailing list r6rs-discuss@lists.r6rs.org http://lists.r6rs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/r6rs-discuss
