Did you see Danny's reply pointing you at =~
? There's also equal~? in the teaching languages. Robby On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 4:15 PM, John Riedl <ri...@umn.edu> wrote: > Of course something like check-within is what is needed. The point > is: there ought to be something like check-within that can be used in > a function to test "equality within a delta". > > I suppose it's fine for each student to define one herself; I'm just > saying I think it's so important it ought to be built-in. > > Best, > John > > On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 02:23:16PM -0400, Shriram Krishnamurthi wrote: >> check-within >> >> http://docs.racket-lang.org/test-engine/index.html#(def._((lib._test-engine/racket-tests..rkt)._check-within)) > > Yes. That's exactly what students should be using ubstead of anything > that even looks like an equality-test. The only time you'd want an > actual equality test on inexact numbers is whan you're using it > algorithmically instead of numerically, such as attaching a memo-pad to > a function on inexactt numbers. > _________________________________________________ > For list-related administrative tasks: > http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users > _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
