On Fri, Dec 21, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Mark H Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:
> R6RS and R7RS-draft-8 require that (eqv? +0.0 -0.0) => #f
R6RS says eqv? should behave like =.
Within the spec, there is no mention of the required behavior
of comparative procedures, then only mention is:
These predicates must be transitive.
(let ((x +0.0)
(y -0.0))
(map (lambda (op)
(list (op x y) (op x y)))
(list = > <)))
=> ((#t #t) (#f #f) (#f #f))
On IronScheme, which I (not being a numerical analyst) believe to be
transitive[0].
Thus the behavior on IronScheme is still strictly correct for R6RS
conformance.
Am I wrong?
Cheers
leppie
[0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transitive_relation
--
http://codeplex.com/IronScheme
http://xacc.wordpress.com
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
