Daniel Villeneuve scripsit:

> Apologies: I somehow managed to completely miss that the output was
> in the text, wrongly inferring that the two "unspecified" results
> meant that the value of (= 1 1.0) was implementation-defined.

No problem.  It's better to use consistent formatting in the "and prints" style.

--
A rose by any other name                            John Cowan
may smell as sweet,                                 http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
but if you called it an onion                       cowan@ccil.org
you'd get cooks very confused.          --RMS

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