On Mon, 15 Aug 2011, Jussi Piitulainen wrote: > An example in July draft 6.2.5 shows (real? -2.5+0.0i) as #t. The text > above the examples says (real? z) if and only if (zero? (imag-part z)) > and (exact? (imag-part z)). The imag-part is clearly not exact.
Just off the cuff I thought fully known concrete finite-recision reals such as 0.0 were exact. How is it not? There is no uncertainty (no hashes indicated), so it is mathematically equal to an exact rational number. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
