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

Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.

To: bear <bear@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
From: Alan Watson <a.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2005 15:30:02 -0500
Cc: Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, schlie@xxxxxxxxxxx, srfi-70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: srfi-70@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507181834160.8883@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Centro de Radioastronomía y Astrofísica UNAM
References: <BF008CB9.ADBD%schlie@xxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507172253580.32708@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050718185736.ECB9C1B77B4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0507181834160.8883@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050317)

Also, is the prefixed `x' for exact; wouldn't `e' be more Schemely?

Wouldn't exact-foo and inexact-foo be more in keeping with other R5RSprocedure names? After all, we swallowed call-with-current-continuation.


Regards,

Alan
--
Dr Alan Watson
Centro de Radioastronomía y Astrofísica
Universidad Astronómico Nacional de México

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
  - From: Aubrey Jaffer

References:
- Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
  - From: Paul Schlie
- Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
  - From: bear
- Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
  - From: Aubrey Jaffer
- Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
  - From: bear

Prev by Date: Re: inexactness vs. exactness
Next by Date: Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
Previous by thread: Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
Next by thread: Re: Nitpick with FLOOR etc.
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread