From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Handle products with exact 0 differently, etc Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:24 -0500 Message-ID: <874o8nuj7v.fsf@yeeloong.netris.org> References: <87ipx4vtvg.fsf@yeeloong.netris.org> <87mxmf1gi3.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87k4hjuu82.fsf@yeeloong.netris.org> <87bp2vtduh.fsf@ossau.uklinux.net> <87ei7runpa.fsf@yeeloong.netris.org> <87aaifuktj.fsf@yeeloong.netris.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296622667 32764 80.91.229.12 (2 Feb 2011 04:57:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 04:57:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org, Neil Jerram To: Noah Lavine Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 02 05:57:43 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: guile-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkUmk-0005v8-8B for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 02 Feb 2011 05:57:42 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58501 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkUmg-0002Zt-GS for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:38 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45662 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PkUmc-0002Zh-JS for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:35 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkUma-0005hp-UQ for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:34 -0500 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([216.204.32.208]:41596) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PkUma-0005hM-RD for guile-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:32 -0500 Original-Received: from ip68-9-118-38.ri.ri.cox.net ([68.9.118.38] helo=freedomincluded) by world.peace.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkUmU-0001kf-Fr; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:26 -0500 Original-Received: from mhw by freedomincluded with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkUmS-00084u-EH; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:57:24 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Noah Lavine's message of "Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:28:50 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 216.204.32.208 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:11505 Archived-At: Noah Lavine 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 doubt, the behavior of (* 0 X) that I am advocating (that it should yield an inexact result when X is inexact) is clearly permitted by both the R5RS and the R6RS. That much is beyond any doubt. My disagreement with the R6RS is that it _permits_ an exact 0 result in this case, even when infinities and NaNs are supported as numeric objects. > Therefore I think it would be great if you would send an email with > exactly what you said here to scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org, which > is the public discussion forum for R7RS. Yes, thank you for suggesting that, I should write something up. Mark