John Cowan wrote: > Note also that fixnums often go up to 2^60 these days.
60-bit fixnums satisfy almost all of the practical need for bignums, so they'd be a reasonable minimum. That would force 32-bit implementations to provide bignums or at least fixed-precision boxed integers (e.g. Java.lang.Long), but avoid unnecessary work for 64-bit ones. >> (This isn't a vote; I don't think I use Scheme enough to get a vote. >> My opinion is relevant only because I'm one of the marginal practical >> users R7RS-large is aimed at, who might use Scheme more if it were >> less painful.) > > All the more reason for you to vote, because that voice needs to be > represented on WG2. So please do. All right, I vote no on all four. The full numeric tower is important enough to standardize, but not important enough to require. _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
