[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Clarification of chapter 1 overview bits re: exactness and complex numbers

From: John Cowan <cowan>
Date: Thu Jan 25 10:40:54 2007

Michael Sperber scripsit:

> (The report doesn't really mandate exact complex numbers anymore as of
> the 5.92 draft.)

Say what? 9.9.1 includes make-rectangular among the procedures that
"must return the correct exact result provided all their arguments are
exact". Furthermore, the token "1+i" must represent an exact number.

And why on earth would the requirement for exact complex numbers be
dropped?

-- 
John Cowan    cowan_at_ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
The present impossibility of giving a scientific explanation is no proof
that there is no scientific explanation. The unexplained is not to be
identified with the unexplainable, and the strange and extraordinary
nature of a fact is not a justification for attributing it to powers
above nature.  --The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "telepathy" (1913)

Received on Thu Jan 25 2007 - 10:40:46 UTC