Another nit; my favorite numbers

[willc%tekchips.tek.csnet@CSNET-RELAY.ARPA]

The description of map in section 6.9 says that its first argument must
be a procedure of one argument.  The description should say instead
that "The {\it list}s must be lists, and {\it proc} must be a procedure
taking as many arguments as there are {\it list}s."

----------------------------------------------------------------
Gerry asked what my favorite proposal was for the implicit exactness
of numeric constants.  It is:

    1.  Constants of the form x+yi, x-yi, and x@y are exact iff both x
        and y are exact as real constants.
    2.  Constants of the form x/y are exact iff both x and y are exact
        as integer constants and there is no explicit prefix that says
        otherwise.
    3.  Constants that contain sharp signs to indicate imprecise digits
        are inexact unless there is an explicit prefix that says
        otherwise.
    4.  Constants that contain a nonempty exponent suffix are exact iff
        they are exact after shifting the decimal point and/or adding
        zeroes to eliminate the exponent.  (For example, 1.1e6 would
        be treated as 1100000, 40e-3 would be treated as .040, 2/3e2
        would be treated as 200/3, and 2/3e-2 would be treated as 2/300.)
    5.  Constants that contain a decimal point but no exponent or sharp
        signs indicating imprecise digits are exact iff there are no
        digits to the right of the decimal point and there is no explicit
        prefix that says otherwise.
    6.  Constants that contain no decimal point, exponent, or sharp
        signs indicating imprecise digits are exact iff there is no
        explicit prefix that says otherwise.

Whew!  Rule 4 is probably the most controversial, followed by rule 5.

peace, Will