[r6rs-discuss] fixnum->flonum but no flonum->fixnum?
sperber at deinprogramm.de
Mon Mar 24 07:15:44 EDT 2008
Bradley Lucier <lucier at math.purdue.edu> writes:
> I tried to search the archives using google, but it isn't so easy
> when searching for non-letter characters.
> At any rate, it appears there's a fixnum->flonum, but no flonum-
> >fixnum; is this intentional? Is there a rationale available?
This was present in the original draft of SRFI 77, but removed during
the discussion period. You'll find a statement to that effect in the
"Revision History" section on
Will Clinger made the actual change, but I assume it was made in
response to the general call to pare down the set of operations on
flonums, many of which had only marginal value.
Cheers =8-} Mike
Friede, Völkerverständigung und überhaupt blabla
More information about the r6rs-discuss