My point was that inexactness leads to a lot of nasty incoherence. But in the spirit of asking naive questions...
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 12:14 PM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt <sa...@ccs.neu.edu> wrote: > No, it's not a bug. Since 1e100 is an inexact number, there's > uncertainty about the minimum of those two numbers, So could a conforming implementation return 1e100 as the answer? (min 0 1e100) => 1e100 -- ~jrm _________________________________________________ For list-related administrative tasks: http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users
