John Cowan writes: > 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.
The report does not tell what the #-notation means. As far as I can see, it says only that a constant is inexact if (among other things) it contains a "#" character in place of a digit. (6.2.4 Syntax of numerical constants) One has to go to the formal grammar to learn that any "#" characters must be trailing digits. An indication of the intended meaning of the notation should be added if the notation is being kept. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
