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

*To*: Aubrey Jaffer <jaffer@martigny.ai.mit.edu>*Subject*: Re: four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC*From*: david carlton <carlton@husc.harvard.edu>*Date*: Sun, 17 May 92 15:47:30 -0400*Cc*: rrrs-authors@mc.lcs.mit.edu, carlton@mc.lcs.mit.edu*In-Reply-To*: Your message of "Sun, 17 May 92 14:24:59 EDT." <9205171422.aa17011@mc.lcs.mit.edu>*Satan*: call-with-current-continuation

On Sun, 17 May 92 14:24:59 -0400, Aubrey Jaffer <jaffer@martigny.ai.mit.edu> said: > <3> > Similarly, I would like the transcendental functions EXP, LOG, SIN, > COS, TAN, ASIN, ACOS, ATAN, MAKE-RECTANGULAR, MAKE-POLAR, and ANGLE > not be required to accept exact arguments. When I take SIN of an > exact number it is because I forgot to multiply it times pi. I would > appreciate Scheme catching this error for me. I expect this is true > in the vast majority of cases. EXACT->INEXACT is always availble for > the one in a million program which actually wants (SIN 1). I don't like this too much. I can imagine an exact 0 being the argument of a call to SIN, which I think should be allowed. Also, there's nothing that says that exact numbers can't include, say, multiples of pi; even though (as far as I know) no implementations currently do that, I wouldn't like to do things like the above which discourage their doing that. david carlton carlton@husc.harvard.edu I used to be a FUNDAMENTALIST, but then I heard about the HIGH RADIATION LEVELS and bought an ENCYCLOPEDIA!!

**Follow-Ups**:**four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC***From:*"Guillermo J. Rozas" <jinx@martigny.ai.mit.edu>

**References**:**four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC***From:*Aubrey Jaffer <jaffer@martigny.ai.mit.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC** - Next by Date:
**multiple values proposal** - Prev by thread:
**four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC** - Next by thread:
**four issues for R5RS meeting at Xerox PARC** - Index(es):