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

Re: arithmetic issues

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.

bear wrote:
> You've promoted semantics which are mere accidents of hardware
> implementation to the level of requirements.  I firmly believe
> that any scheme code which relies for its correctness on an
> overflow or a roundoff is in error, so your "type specific
> operations" are seen as implementing things which are not, in
> fact, correct representations of the operations after which
> they are named.

You are wrong about that.  The rest of your argument rests
upon that incorrect belief, so I needn't respond to it.