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
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports