[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Exactness is orthogonal to type

[Aubrey Jaffer]

	         submitter's name: Aubrey Jaffer
	submitter's email address: agj at alum.mit.edu
		    type of issue: Defect
		         priority: Major
		   R6RS component: Arithmetic
	    version of the report: 5.91
one-sentence summary of the issue: 

Exactness is orthogonal to type

    full description of the issue:

Page 2: 2.1. Numerical Types

    In order to catch uses of inexact numbers where exact numbers are
    required, Scheme explicitly distinguishes exact from inexact
    numbers.  This distinction is orthogonal to the dimension of type.

To my ear this says that each numerical type must be present in both
exact and inexact varieties.  If that is the case, then the functions
of sections "16.5. Exact arithmetic" and "16.6. Inexact arithmetic"
are largely pointless; numeric code must dispatch to any of the
numeric types whether restricted to exacts or inexacts.

I propose that either

 * "This distinction is orthogonal to the dimension of type."  be
   removed or modified; or

 * Sections "16.5. Exact arithmetic" and "16.6. Inexact arithmetic"
   be removed.