Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes:
Hello Mark,
I haven't read through all of the discussion yet, but it's obvious
that you have good reasons for wanting (* 0 X) to be NaN when X is
NB (and for the record), NaN here should be inexact.
Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
In other words, the argument is that any inexact number might actually
be infinite. (Right?)
Yes.
That strikes me as stretching the idea of inexactness too far; and also
as not useful, because I'm sure
Here's another batch of numerics patches. The most important one
changes the way products involving exact 0 are handled:
* libguile/numbers.c (scm_product): Handle exact 0 differently. A
product containing an exact 0 now returns an exact 0 if and only if
the other arguments are all exact.
Hi Mark,
On Tue 01 Feb 2011 13:09, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Subject: [PATCH] Trigonometric functions return exact numbers in some
cases
Why would you want this?
Just wondering.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
On Tue 01 Feb 2011 13:09, Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Here's another batch of numerics patches.
Thanks, applied all but the trigonometric functions one, pending further
discussion.
Andy
--
http://wingolog.org/
Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
Here's another batch of numerics patches. The most important one
changes the way products involving exact 0 are handled:
* libguile/numbers.c (scm_product): Handle exact 0 differently. A
product containing an exact 0 now returns an exact 0 if and
Subject: [PATCH] Trigonometric functions return exact numbers in some
cases
Why would you want this?
I'm a developer of Maxima, a free CAS (computer algebra system). I'm
interested in building a free CAS on top of Guile, probably with large
chunks of functionality adapted from Maxima. As
Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
* libguile/numbers.c (scm_product): Handle exact 0 differently. A
product containing an exact 0 now returns an exact 0 if and only if
the other arguments are all exact.
I don't get this one. I would expect ... are all finite.
I almost wrote
Mark H Weaver m...@netris.org writes:
The point of the exact/inexact distinction is to ensure that if you see
an exact number, you can trust that it is provably the correct answer,
and that no inaccuracies associated with inexact arithmetic along the
way could possibly have corrupted that
Neil Jerram n...@ossau.uklinux.net writes:
In this case, the inaccuracies associated with inexact arithmetic could
result in an infinity being misrepresented as a finite number, or vice
versa. For example, if X is inexact, then we cannot claim that the
result of (* 0 (/ X)) is an exact 0,
Hello Mark,
I haven't read through all of the discussion yet, but it's obvious
that you have good reasons for wanting (* 0 X) to be NaN when X is
inexact. And yet for compatibility reasons it is nice if Guile agrees
with Scheme standards. Therefore I think it would be great if you
would send an
Noah Lavine noah.b.lav...@gmail.com writes:
I haven't read through all of the discussion yet, but it's obvious
that you have good reasons for wanting (* 0 X) to be NaN when X is
inexact. And yet for compatibility reasons it is nice if Guile agrees
with Scheme standards.
In case there is any
12 matches
Mail list logo
