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

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 70 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 70 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

*To*: bear@xxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: infinities reformulated*From*: Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 22:23:26 -0400 (EDT)*Cc*: srfi-70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: srfi-70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0506040915430.19280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (message from bear on Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:42:21 -0700 (PDT))*References*: <20050531071658.EC10C1167@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050531234805.0EC7F1B77B4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <874qcgg4uf.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050602161228.B3E3D1B77B4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0506040915430.19280@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

| Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 09:42:21 -0700 (PDT) | From: bear <bear@xxxxxxxxx> | | For heavy math work, I want to be able to specify the precision | used, in one of several ways; For example, by saying | | (with-inexact-precision 128 | ... | (sqrt 2) | ...) | | or | | (sqrt 2 :precision 128) | | or (without keywords) | | (sqrt 2 128) | | or something. Can you give an example of a calculation where you expect that choosing a reduced precision will reap a large benefit?

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*bear

**References**:**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*Chongkai Zhu

**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*Thomas Bushnell BSG

**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: infinities reformulated***From:*bear

- Prev by Date:
**Re: string->number** - Next by Date:
**LIMIT recommendations** - Previous by thread:
**Re: infinities reformulated** - Next by thread:
**Re: infinities reformulated** - Index(es):