I've been studying the numbers grammar in section 1.3.3 of the Racket reference and I think I've spotted a few mistakes:
1. <exact-complex_n> allows the imaginary part of an exact complex number to be signed given that an exact rational may be signed: <exact-integer_n> ::= [<sign>] <unsigned-integer_n> <exact-rational_n> ::= <exact-integer_n> / <unsigned-integer_n> <exact-complex_n> ::= <exact-rational_n> <sign> <exact-rational_n> i The rule allows exact complex numbers like this one: 1/2+-3/4i but ... >1/2+-3/4i 1/2+-3/4i: undefined; cannot reference undefined identifier 2. The three alternatives in <inexact-simple_n> should be unsigned given that <inexact-unsigned_n> uses <inexact-normal_n> which uses <inexact-simple_n>. But since exact integers may be signed, the second alternative in <inexact-simple_n> may be signed: <inexact-simple_n> ::= [<exact-integer_n>] . <digits#_n> 3. <inexact-normal_n> allows # in an exponent: <digits#_n> ::= <digit_n>+ #* ‹inexact-normal_n› ::= <inexact-simple_n> [<exp-mark_n> [<sign>] <digits#_n>] but ... >3.14e+87# 3.14e+87#: undefined; cannot reference undefined identifier ____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
