Peter Bex scripsit: > While we're on the topic of numerical stuff in the standard, I'd like > to ask why the "padding"/placeholder digits for numbers (# characters > instead of digits inside a number) is kept around.
I agree that it's bogus. The ballot question asked about the #s from R5RS and the mantissa-width specifier (|nnn) from R6RS: the first, the second, neither, or both. The vote was inconclusive, so the R5RS status quo was kept. > I think there's also a bug in the R7RS BNF for numbers; it doesn't seem > to allow for a complex number consisting of a real and imaginary > component which are infinite. AFAICT, only an <ureal> can follow the > sign after the first number in the rectangular format. > Several Schemes I've tested this with simply allow "+inf.0+inf.0i" for > this. The R6RS BNF seems to allow it, though (it's handled specially). Already fixed on trunk. -- You know, you haven't stopped talking John Cowan since I came here. You must have been http://www.ccil.org/~cowan vaccinated with a phonograph needle. [email protected] --Rufus T. Firefly _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
