This is the mail archive of the guile@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Guile project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?

To: "Greg J. Badros" <gjb at cs dot washington dot edu>
Subject: Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
From: Mikael Djurfeldt <mdj at mdj dot nada dot kth dot se>
Date: 17 Jan 2000 20:38:45 +0100
Cc: Janis Dzerins <jonis at mt dot lv>, guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
Cc: djurfeldt at nada dot kth dot se
References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10001171647520.741-100000@goo.dev.mt.lv> <qrrn1q4d1dh.fsf@clavicle.cs.washington.edu> <xy74scc7ect.fsf@mdj.nada.kth.se> <qrrk8l8d04c.fsf@clavicle.cs.washington.edu>

"Greg J. Badros" <gjb@cs.washington.edu> writes:

> Making it work with bignums is more than just a matter of argument
> conversion, right?

Yes. :)

> (logior (exact->inexact 1) 2)
> 
> throw an error?

Yes, I think so.

> I.e., if it happens to be an inexact number that, for all intents
> and purposes is an integer, should the primitive be that picky?

In my opinion, since `logior' has no meaning for the general inexact
numbers, it should be restricted to exact values.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
  - From: Greg J. Badros

References:
- Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
  - From: Janis Dzerins
- Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
  - From: Greg J. Badros
- Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
  - From: Mikael Djurfeldt
- Re: Should logior (and friends) operate only on inums?
  - From: Greg J. Badros

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]