[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*: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: arithmetic issues*From*: Bradley Lucier <lucier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 14:45:49 -0500*Cc*: Bradley Lucier <lucier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, bear@xxxxxxxxx, jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <871x2cowe8.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*References*: <20051021145326.816C11B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051021155906.GC16464@NYCMJCOWA2> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510210910130.18969@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051022011713.1F22A1B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <87vezqmjkq.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051022232548.5A2971B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <873bmtxdnm.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051023181854.4E7DD1B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <871x2cowe8.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

On Oct 23, 2005, at 2:39 PM, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:

Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:| From: Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@xxxxxxxxxx> | Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 17:47:25 -0700 | | Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: | > ...| > That still prevents an implementation from displayinginformation| > about what type of NaN was returned. Such information could be | > helpful to find the call which generated the NaN. | | Huh? How does it prevent such? We *could* mandate a readable| written representation for NaNs without manding that printing aNaN| should produce that representation, since it would still beallowed| to signal an error. (And then, once it is signalled, it could | print *anything it wants*.) || Moreover, nothing prevents the mandated written representationfrom| optionally including implementation defined contents, if that | should be useful. When different NaNs are returned depending on the circumstances creating them, I would like my implementation to display them like this: #<not-a-number expt>Sure, that seems fine. We could mandate that as the readable written representation!

Brad (who doesn't really want to get into this, ...)

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

**References**:**arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*John.Cowan

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*bear

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Thomas Bushnell BSG

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Thomas Bushnell BSG

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*Thomas Bushnell BSG

- Prev by Date:
**Re: +nan.0 problems** - Next by Date:
**Re: arithmetic issues** - Previous by thread:
**Re: arithmetic issues** - Next by thread:
**Re: arithmetic issues** - Index(es):