On Mon, Sep 05, 2011 at 01:54:12PM -0400, Aubrey Jaffer wrote: > | Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 18:57:16 +0200 > | From: Peter Bex <[email protected]> > | > | On Sun, Sep 04, 2011 at 09:12:42PM -0400, Aubrey Jaffer wrote: > | > I believe that R5RS permits engineering-notation. > | > | Absolutely; I was wondering how it decides to print 3/4 as 750.0e-3 > | considering 7.5e-1 is equally acceptable, as is 0.75 or 75e-2 or > | any other exponent prefixed by a suitably scaled number. > > In engineering-notation the exponent is always an integer multiple of > 3. SCM scales the matissa to be between 1 and 1000, and omits the > exponent when it is 0.
I see. I've now added support for this kind of notation to the tests, and I've also added a mode in which it accepts fractional numbers being parsed into flonums, like the version of SCM which I have (a horribly outdated version 5e3) seems to do. Chicken without the "numbers" egg does this as well. Most failing tests in SCM are about NaN/Inf syntax and padding now; 27 errors with 5e3. I'm sure the newer version has less errors. Cheers, Peter -- http://sjamaan.ath.cx -- "The process of preparing programs for a digital computer is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic experience much like composing poetry or music." -- Donald Knuth _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
