John Cowan writes:
> Peter Bex scripsit:
>
> > While we're on the topic of numerical stuff in the standard, I'd
> > like to ask why the "padding"/placeholder digits for numbers (#
> > characters instead of digits inside a number) is kept around.
>
> I agree that it's bogus.  The ballot question asked about the #s
> from R5RS and the mantissa-width specifier (|nnn) from R6RS: the
> first, the second, neither, or both.  The vote was inconclusive, so
> the R5RS status quo was kept.

The report does not tell what the #-notation means. As far as I can
see, it says only that a constant is inexact if (among other things)
it contains a "#" character in place of a digit. (6.2.4 Syntax of
numerical constants) One has to go to the formal grammar to learn that
any "#" characters must be trailing digits.

An indication of the intended meaning of the notation should be added
if the notation is being kept.

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