[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Formal Comment: NaN should be considered a number, not a real

From: Joe Marshall <jmarshall>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 21:13:15 -0700

On 6/22/07, Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net> wrote:
> You're just wrong on that
> point.

I don't want to bore the readers, and this discussion doesn't have
much to do with the original question of whether NaN is a number.
Therefore, I've posted on my blog http://funcall.blogspot.com/ a
message showing how floating-point arithmetic runs into problems if
you attempt to model it with interval arithmetic. I'd be happy to
continue our discussion in blogspace, on usenet, or on a different
email thread.

-- 
~jrm
Received on Mon Jun 25 2007 - 00:13:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:01 UTC