Re: [Chicken-hackers] numerator/denominator

[Elf]

oh, and if youre confused by the third example for numerator/denominator
in r5rs, look at 6.2.2 also (exactness of types).

-elf

On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Elf wrote:

> not all flonums are rational.
> chicken is perfectly compliant with r5 here: r5 does not require the entire
> numeric tower.
>
> -elf
>
> On Tue, 4 Aug 2009, Thomas Bushnell BSG wrote:
>
> >  The manual claims that numerator and denominator are not implemented,
> >  but of course, they are, just in a way that doesn't quite comply with
> >  R5RS.  (R5RS says that any rational is a valid argument, but Chicken
> >  only accepts integers.)
> >
> >  Two possible solutions: Change the manual to document reality; implement
> >  numerator/denominator for flonums.
> >
> >  Thomas
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Chicken-hackers mailing list
> >  address@hidden
> >  http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Chicken-hackers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-hackers