The proper way to handle this would, as you suggest, be to distinguish different kinds on infinities. Then, perhaps, countable infinity could be regarded as scheme:ish exact while infinities of higher cardinality would not (since scheme's handling of that kind of numbers is an approximation and, thus, not exact).
Den tis 28 sep. 2021 11:56Stefan Israelsson Tampe <stefan.ita...@gmail.com> skrev: > Then this does not work well > > (fold min (inf) (list 1 > 2000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 > 3 4)) > > which is a pity, we should have an exact inf as well > > On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 10:32 AM <to...@tuxteam.de> wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 10:15:30AM +0200, Stefan Israelsson Tampe wrote: >> > Why is (min (inf) 1) = 1.0 inexact? >> >> Because inf's result is inexact. The same as (min 3 3.5) is inexact, >> too. >> >> It seems that the `inexactness' is contagious across arithmetic >> generics (I haven't found an explicit place in the Guile docs; >> the racket docs are more explicit about that). >> >> Cheers >> - t >> >
