On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Kevin Wortman <kwortman@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 1) Should R7RS-large require arbitrarily large (up to implementation
>> restrictions like memory) exact integers?
>
>
> Yes
>
>>
>> 2) Should R7RS-large require support for exact rational numbers?
>> (This is independent of #1: Wraith Scheme provides ratios of fixnums
>> but not bignums).
>
>
> Yes
>
> I don't have strong views about (3) or (4), so I abstain on those.
>
> Best regards,
> Kevin Wortman
>
I care about reproducibility, sensible defaults, and extensibility.

Unpredictable behavior makes for such great security issues,
unbalanced ledgers, irradiated patients, exploding rockets, etc.!

Whatever numeric tower R7RS has or hasn't
(1) it must be easy for the user to specify the requirements for her
programs and trust the results.
(2) the defaults should make sense. Either minimal (only fixnum and
flonum, only bignum) or maximal (what Common Lisp has and more).
(3) Extensibility would be nice. Design-your-own-numeric-tower, anyone?

I admit I'm not impressed by the lack of first-class modularity in
Scheme, the huge collections of monomorphic functions, or sometimes
unextensible ad hoc polymorphic functions. Compare and contrast with,
e.g., scalaz or my own Lisp-Interface-Library.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
The American diplomat to the Russian: "My country too is free: in the USA too
anyone may freely publish the dirty little secrets of president Medvedev!"

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "scheme-reports-wg2" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to scheme-reports-wg2+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.