[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: leppie <xacc.ide@x>*Subject*: Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0*From*: Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>*Date*: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 05:51:40 -0500*Cc*: John Cowan <cowan@x>, scheme-reports <scheme-reports@x>*In-reply-to*: <CAOLEvS0hcjUBkwZnYSf6oZhqLSrKChm0Gc4bv_WkWk+XTSO4hQ@mail.gmail.com> (leppie's message of "Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:11:00 +0200")*References*: <878v8z5iq8.fsf@tines.lan> <874njn5b65.fsf@tines.lan> <20121215204015.GG13463@mercury.ccil.org> <87obhv3ts0.fsf@tines.lan> <20121215231548.GC10312@mercury.ccil.org> <87bodu4r0r.fsf@tines.lan> <20121216041031.GE10312@mercury.ccil.org> <87pq25yh5s.fsf@tines.lan> <20121219221955.GH4477@mercury.ccil.org> <87d2y5y6fb.fsf@tines.lan> <20121221055315.GB28661@mercury.ccil.org> <87y5grsrvm.fsf@tines.lan> <CAOLEvS0hcjUBkwZnYSf6oZhqLSrKChm0Gc4bv_WkWk+XTSO4hQ@mail.gmail.com>

leppie <xacc.ide@x> writes: > IronScheme: (#t #t #t #f #f #t) > > Will have to investigate, other than knowing (eqv? -0.0 0.0) => #t in > IronScheme. Assuming that +0.0 and -0.0 are not operationally equivalent (they aren't in IEEE 754 because their reciprocals are +inf.0 and -inf.0), both R6RS and R7RS-draft-8 require that (eqv? +0.0 -0.0) => #f, which in turn means that the first three results should be #f. Other than that, I don't see anything wrong with these results. The two false results in the fourth and fifth tests are correct given that IronScheme supports mixed-exactness complex numbers in the special case where the real part is inexact and the imaginary part is an exact zero. This is highly desirable, IMO. Mark _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list Scheme-reports@x http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*leppie <xacc.ide@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*leppie <xacc.ide@x>

**References**:**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*John Cowan <cowan@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*Mark H Weaver <mhw@x>

**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0***From:*leppie <xacc.ide@x>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Next by Date:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Previous by thread:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Next by thread:
**Re: [Scheme-reports] Strong win later reversed: Real numbers have imaginary part #e0** - Index(es):