[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.

Paul Schlie <schlie@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> - Personally, it seems reasonable to require that a base implementation
>   support only finite modular integers with a precision sufficient to
>   represent the larger of:
>   (integer-range) => <max-positive-representable-integer> or
>   (length <list-of-all-allocatable-elements-for-a-given-implementation>)

My toy Scheme interpreter is hosted by a language with native bignums,
and no distinction between fixnums and bignums in the public API.
A requirement to support modular arithmetic would be inconvenient here.

(Actually the hosting language does have some unsafe fixnum-only
operations, but I'm not sure whether to treat them as public.)

   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak@xxxxxxxxxx
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/