[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: arithmetic issues
| From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx>
| Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 18:22:45 -0700
| Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
| > I think that an implementation should be allowed to signal an
| > error under some conditions where an error object is encountered.
| > Mandating readable written representations for error objects
| > prevents an implementation from signaling such errors.
| I think this might be confused. Surely the mandating of a
| representation would mean "if you print something (rather than
| signalling an error) you should print it such-and-such a way."
That still prevents an implementation from displaying information
about what type of NaN was returned. Such information could be
helpful to find the call which generated the NaN.
R*RS have so far constrained only output which was readable. That
policy allows an implementation to present debugging info in results
without making every object first class.