From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marius Vollmer Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: mpz_cmp_d and NaNs in = and < Date: 10 May 2003 14:52:29 +0200 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87fznnge0i.fsf@zagadka.ping.de> References: <87isspt1sc.fsf@zip.com.au> <87issjvhhm.fsf@zip.com.au> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1052571139 24319 80.91.224.249 (10 May 2003 12:52:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 May 2003 12:52:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: guile-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 10 14:52:16 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 19ETpn-0006Ju-00 for ; Sat, 10 May 2003 14:52:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ETr5-0007cA-03 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:53:35 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ETqe-0007Ie-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:53:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ETqW-00073Z-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:53:00 -0400 Original-Received: from gnuftp.gnu.org ([199.232.41.6]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ETqU-0006up-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:52:58 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.dokom.net ([195.253.8.218]) by gnuftp.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 19ETqT-0008FM-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 08:52:57 -0400 Original-Received: from dialin.speedway42.dip34.dokom.de ([195.138.42.34] helo=zagadka.ping.de) by mail.dokom.net with smtp (Exim 3.36 #3) id 19ETrv-0005jH-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 May 2003 14:54:27 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 29968 invoked by uid 1000); 10 May 2003 12:52:29 -0000 Original-To: Kevin Ryde In-Reply-To: <87issjvhhm.fsf@zip.com.au> Original-Lines: 15 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3 X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2324 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:2324 Kevin Ryde writes: > I applied this change. I left in the tests on complex numbers in `='; > someone smarter than me will have to advise whether it's true in fact > that they're not reached (on account of the imaginary part always > being non-zero). I think that a lot of places expect it to be true that all complex number objects in Guile have a non-zero imaginary part. But your conservative approach is OK, nevertheless, and should probably remain that way. For example, we can't currently represent negative imaginary zero. we might want to change that, maybe. -- GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel