Here's my vote: > 1) Should R7RS-large require arbitrarily large (up to implementation > restrictions like memory) exact integers?
Yes. Having them available makes it possible to program with exact integers without fear of overflow to inexactness or an implementation restriction. They can be implemented in Scheme, but cannot be plugged into Scheme's generic arithmetic easily. > 2) Should R7RS-large require support for exact rational numbers? Yes. Same rationale as #1. > 3) Should R7RS-large require support for exact complex numbers? No. The use case for these is not well demonstrated, and many existing largish Schemes don't provide them (but provide inexact complex numbers). > 4) Should R7RS-large require inexact complex numbers? Yes. They are not needed for most programs, but they cost little for people who don't care. If they are not wanted altogether (real arithmetic only), it's easily to provide a flonum-only library. See also the rationale for #1. -- John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [email protected] We want more school houses and less jails; more books and less arsenals; more learning and less vice; more constant work and less crime; more leisure and less greed; more justice and less revenge; in fact, more of the opportunities to cultivate our better natures. --Samuel Gompers _______________________________________________ Scheme-reports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports
