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

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 77 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 77 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

*To*: bear <bear@xxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: Arithmetic issues*From*: Andre van Tonder <andre@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:47:30 -0400 (EDT)*Cc*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510181913570.8761@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*References*: <y9lzmp775oz.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510181143440.2071@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510181913570.8761@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, bear wrote:

The bitwise operations operate on exact integers only. Should they live in the section on exact arithmetic? Should they carry ex prefixes? Or should they be extended to work on inexact integers as well?I would say that having them operate on exact integers in the first place is questionable; These are operations on bit vectors, not operations on numbers, and their semantics require information (the vector length) which is not expressed by the numbers. To say that they are defined on numbers is to confuse the number with a particular representation.

Are these operations truly going to be useful for portable programs?

Cheers Andre

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: Arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**References**:**Arithmetic issues***From:*Michael Sperber

**Re: Arithmetic issues***From:*bear

**Re: Arithmetic issues***From:*bear

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Arithmetic issues** - Next by Date:
**Re: Arithmetic issues** - Previous by thread:
**Re: Arithmetic issues** - Next by thread:
**Re: Arithmetic issues** - Index(es):