[scheme-reports-wg2] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (29 Apr 2014 03:49 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Jay Freeman (29 Apr 2014 06:51 UTC)
[scheme-reports-wg2] Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer (29 Apr 2014 07:55 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Jay Freeman (29 Apr 2014 08:37 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Peter Bex (29 Apr 2014 11:45 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Peter Bex (29 Apr 2014 13:18 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Peter Bex (29 Apr 2014 14:01 UTC)
[scheme-reports-wg2] Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer (29 Apr 2014 14:11 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Peter Bex (29 Apr 2014 14:25 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Alaric Snell-Pym (29 Apr 2014 22:13 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (29 Apr 2014 22:54 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Alaric Snell-Pym (30 Apr 2014 12:59 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (30 Apr 2014 16:38 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Peter Bex (01 May 2014 08:57 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Jussi Piitulainen (29 Apr 2014 13:58 UTC)
[scheme-reports-wg2] Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer (29 Apr 2014 16:14 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Devon Schudy (29 Apr 2014 15:38 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot John Cowan (29 Apr 2014 17:04 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Devon Schudy (01 May 2014 13:02 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Alaric Snell-Pym (01 May 2014 13:11 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Takashi Kato (29 Apr 2014 20:07 UTC)
Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Perry E. Metzger (29 Apr 2014 22:48 UTC)
Re: [scheme-reports-wg2] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Taylan Ulrich Bayirli/Kammer (30 Apr 2014 07:44 UTC)

Re: [Scheme-reports] Reformulated numeric-tower ballot Jussi Piitulainen 29 Apr 2014 13:53 UTC

John Cowan writes:

> [big snip] there are 49 Schemes I've investigated on this point: 17
> Schemes have both exact and inexact complex numbers, 8 have inexact
> complex numbers only, 1 has exact complex numbers only, 23 have no
> complex numbers.  I've counted plain Chicken and Chicken+numbers
> separately for this purpose.

I doubted the usefulness of exact complex numbers - wouldn't they be
manipulated in ways that produce inexact results anyway - but then I
realized/found out that they exist in number theory as "Gaussian
integers" and "Gaussian rationals" and are of some interest as such.

So, if I may, I vote 1) yes 2) yes for requiring exact rational
arithmetic, and 3) yes 4) yes for requiring complex numbers, both
exact and inexact.

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