Daniel Llorens <daniel.llor...@bluewin.ch> writes:
> I think this isn't working as it should either.
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> +1i
> $1 = 0.0+1.0i
> scheme@(guile-user)> 1i
> ;;; <unknown-location>: warning: possibly unbound variable `#{1i}#'
> ERROR: In procedure #<procedure 101d6d4a0 ()>:
> ERROR: In procedure module-lookup: Unbound variable: #{1i}#
No, this is correct. Scheme requires a sign before an imaginary part.
See R5RS section 7.1.1 (Lexical structure).
Thanks,
Mark
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
<number> -> <num 2>| <num 8>
| <num 10>| <num 16>
The following rules for <num R>, <complex R>, <real R>, <ureal R>,
<uinteger R>, and <prefix R> should be replicated for R = 2, 8, 10,
and 16. There are no rules for <decimal 2>, <decimal 8>, and <decimal
16>, which means that numbers containing decimal points or exponents
must be in decimal radix.
<num R> -> <prefix R> <complex R>
<complex R> -> <real R> | <real R> @ <real R>
| <real R> + <ureal R> i | <real R> - <ureal R> i
| <real R> + i | <real R> - i
| + <ureal R> i | - <ureal R> i | + i | - i
<real R> -> <sign> <ureal R>
<ureal R> -> <uinteger R>
| <uinteger R> / <uinteger R>
| <decimal R>
<decimal 10> -> <uinteger 10> <suffix>
| . <digit 10>+ #* <suffix>
| <digit 10>+ . <digit 10>* #* <suffix>
| <digit 10>+ #+ . #* <suffix>
<uinteger R> -> <digit R>+ #*
<prefix R> -> <radix R> <exactness>
| <exactness> <radix R>
<suffix> -> <empty>
| <exponent marker> <sign> <digit 10>+
<exponent marker> -> e | s | f | d | l
<sign> -> <empty> | + | -
<exactness> -> <empty> | #i | #e
<radix 2> -> #b
<radix 8> -> #o
<radix 10> -> <empty> | #d
<radix 16> -> #x
<digit 2> -> 0 | 1
<digit 8> -> 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7
<digit 10> -> <digit>
<digit 16> -> <digit 10> | a | b | c | d | e | f
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
