[Scheme-reports] Missing description of complex polar form

[Malcolm Tredinnick <malcolm.tredinnick@x>]

One of Vincent's recent emails reminded me of this. Nowhere in the report is the polar complex form described. The syntax is mentioned in the grammar on page 50, but when I went hunting for any requirements on the arguments and to confirm my assumptions, it was not to be found.

Archaeological expeditions were similarly unrewarding — the current description of numbers  has remained more or less unchanged since at least R4RS and the 1@1 style is not mentioned. One can kind of reverse-engineer the requirements from the hints in the description of (make-polar ...) and (angle ...) on page 29, but even there it doesn't explicitly tie the polar form to the x@y syntax!

In fact, even the rectangular complex form isn't defined, but it could be argued that x+iy is familiar from high school mathematics, whereas the "@" symbol for polar form is not.

Regards,
Malcolm


_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@x
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports