Re: [Scheme-reports] Padding/placeholders (hashes) in numerical syntax
Aubrey Jaffer 05 Sep 2011 01:12 UTC
| Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2011 16:59:18 -0400
| From: John Cowan <cowan@mercury.ccil.org>
|
| Peter Bex scripsit:
|
| > Later I was told that this might be reconsidered if it was shown
| > to be really difficult to implement.
|
| It's on the ballot now, and so far there are 4 votes in favor to 0
| against to remove it. We won't be sure for a week or so, though.
|
| > The latest version of this test can be found here:
|
| I picked up version 24935.
|
| > Outputs of other Schemes would be interesting to see as well, and
| > suggestions for new testcases are welcome too!
|
| I ran tests against Bigloo, Chez, Chibi, Ikarus, IronScheme, Kawa,
| Larceny, Mosh, SCM, SISC, STklos, Ypsilon on a 32-bit Linux
| system. I tried Scheme 9, but it fails on the syntax-rules
| declaration. The modified scripts and results are at
| http://www.ccil.org/~cowan/temp/strconv-results.zip .
| Here's what I got:
|
| ...
|
| SCM: Inexact complex numbers only. Test "+nan.0+nan.0i" blows up
| with "Wrong type passed to make-rectangular: 0/0" error. When this
| is commented out, 28 errors.
Making string->number case insensitive for infinities and nans
<http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/ftpdir/users/jaffer/scm.zip> reduces
this to 19 "ERROR"s. Seven of these are "SERIALIZATION ERROR"s due to
SCM using engineering notation for numbers greater than 1000. or less
than -1000, or between -1 and 1. I believe that R5RS permits
engineering-notation.
(define (nan? x) (and (number? x) (not (complex? x)))) ; SCM
_______________________________________________
Scheme-reports mailing list
Scheme-reports@scheme-reports.org
http://lists.scheme-reports.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/scheme-reports