[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Clarification of chapter 1 overview bits re: exactness and complex numbers

[John Cowan]

Michael Sperber scripsit:

> (The report doesn't really mandate exact complex numbers anymore as of
> the 5.92 draft.)

Say what?  9.9.1 includes make-rectangular among the procedures that
"must return the correct exact result provided all their arguments are
exact".  Furthermore, the token "1+i" must represent an exact number.

And why on earth would the requirement for exact complex numbers be
dropped?

-- 
John Cowan    cowan at ccil.org    http://ccil.org/~cowan
The present impossibility of giving a scientific explanation is no proof
that there is no scientific explanation. The unexplained is not to be
identified with the unexplainable, and the strange and extraordinary
nature of a fact is not a justification for attributing it to powers
above nature.  --The Catholic Encyclopedia, s.v. "telepathy" (1913)