Re: [Chicken-hackers] [PATCH] Omit warning about exact fractions when asked for an inexact value

[Peter Bex]

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 06:13:05PM -0400, John Cowan wrote:
> The numbers egg should really use an entirely separate strategy for 
> string to number conversion (including `read`).

It already does.  This has been fixed many moons ago in "numbers"
trunk.  See also ticket #734 which I closed with the same comment.

This also required a fix in Chicken core which has been available
since 4.7.4 I think, so it won't work with the latest release whatever
version of numbers you're using.  See also #674.

> I have filed ticket #804.

I've closed the ticket, since it's a duplicate of #788 and #734.

I know these fixes have been a long time coming, and I'm sorry that it's
taking so long, however I hope to tag a new "numbers" release soonish.
There have been many many bugs fixed in this new version, and it will
include (*limited*) support for extended number syntax in _compiled_ code.

Along with this, it will include a types database to support
scrutiny/specialization so that at least for flonum operations things
will be as fast as core Chicken, and it will help to find bugs in code
much easier when compiling.  Thanks to Felix for pushing me to support
this and developing the initial types database!

I will make a release once I've convinced myself that the numbers
database is complete and correct.  This will probably involve extending
the test suite some more (as I've been doing the past two weeks).

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