2012/5/7 Matthew Flatt <[email protected]>: > I'd expect `flexpt' to be the same as `expt', but constrained to flonum > arguments, which would make it the same as > > (define (flexpt a x) > (if (and (flonum? a) (flonum? x)) > (expt a x) > (error ...s))) > > I agree that it would make a fine addition to `racket/flonum', but is > that what you had in mind?
Yes, exactly. /Jens Axel ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
