I see your point. On Feb 14, 2011, at 12:14 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote:
> No, it's not a bug. Since 1e100 is an inexact number, there's > uncertainty about the minimum of those two numbers, and the result is > therefore inexact. > > On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Gregory Woodhouse <gregwoodho...@me.com> > wrote: >> Oops... Now that has to qualify as a bug. >> >> On Feb 14, 2011, at 11:58 AM, Joe Marshall wrote: >> >>> 2011/2/13 José Lopes <jose.lo...@ist.utl.pt>: >>>> I understand. However, not only that disregards type promotion but also is >>>> incoherent since (+ 0 0.0) evaluates to 0.0. >>> >>> Worse: >>> (min 0 1e100) => 0.0 >>> >>> -- >>> ~jrm >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users >> > > > > -- > sam th > sa...@ccs.neu.edu _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
