The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support them
as well.
* module/srfi/srfi-64.scm (within-epsilon): Support complex arguments.
---
v2: Use the same test logic as the reference implementation.
v3: Also adjus
Hello,
lloda writes:
>> On 26 Oct 2024, at 19:22, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> (Cc: lloda.)
>>
>> Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
>>
>>> The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
>>> supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support th
The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support them
as well.
* module/srfi/srfi-64.scm (within-epsilon): Support complex arguments.
---
Require error to be real number and check using (checks notes) Chebyshev
di
> On 26 Oct 2024, at 19:22, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> (Cc: lloda.)
>
> Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
>
>> The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
>> supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support them
>> as well.
>>
>> * module/s
Like I wrote in a separate message, I think test-approximate should check the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euclidean_distance :
(<= (magnitude (- expected value)) epsilon)
For real numbers, it means the same as the current test. It would also work for
other types for which the user has defin
> On 26 Oct 2024, at 16:09, Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> wrote:
>>> * test-approximate requires real arguments. The old version accepted
>>> complex arguments.
>
> No objections, since it seems that (imag-part 0) works just fine, I can
> basically rewrite it to always consider the input complex
Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
> The current recommendation of `list-copy' is not right and does not lead
> to preserving the original list:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (define x (list (cons 'a 1) (cons 'b 2)))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (define y (list-copy x))
> scheme@(guile-user)> (a
Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou skribis:
> From bfeb86d9c7c258ac67de9cdd0b6eabbc01ab0114 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Nikolaos Chatzikonstantinou
> Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 23:27:38 -0400
> Subject: [PATCH] doc: minor typo fix
>
> The incorrect procedure is mentioned; see the example that immediat
Hi!
Juliana Sims skribis:
> * doc/ref/api-debug.texi: Document the peek and pk procedures.
Nice work; documenting it was long overdue! Finally applied.
Thank you and thanks to everyone who helped along the way!
Ludo’.
Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
> Document the #:hide argument. Correct text for implication of leaving
> all optional arguments out.
>
> Tomas Volf (2):
> doc: Document #:hide.
> doc: Fix implication of omitting optional arguments.
Applied, thanks!
Hello,
"Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" skribis:
> From 6838e4da9712425e7e45805a73731bb399d90a86 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Arne Babenhauserheide
> Date: Sat, 20 Jul 2024 15:03:15 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] doc: reference ice-9, scheme, and srfi
>
> * doc/ref/tour.texi (Using Modules): reference
Hi,
(Cc: lloda.)
Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
> The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
> supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support them
> as well.
>
> * module/srfi/srfi-64.scm (within-epsilon): Support complex arguments.
> ---
> Propos
Tomas Volf <~@wolfsden.cz> skribis:
> The specification mandates a string, but with rationale suggesting symbols
> would be a more natural fit.
>
>> In some ways using symbols would be preferable. However, we want
>> human-readable names, and standard Scheme does not provide a way to include
>> sp
The specification mandates reals, but the reference implementation
supports complex numbers. So as implementation extension, support them
as well.
* module/srfi/srfi-64.scm (within-epsilon): Support complex arguments.
---
Proposal for how to extend test-approximate to handle complex arguments.
Ho
The specification mandates a string, but with rationale suggesting symbols
would be a more natural fit.
> In some ways using symbols would be preferable. However, we want
> human-readable names, and standard Scheme does not provide a way to include
> spaces or mixed-case text in literal symbols.
Hello,
I was thinking about this and then forgot to reply. Sorry about that.
Ludovic Courtès writes:
> Hi,
>
> lloda skribis:
>
>> I'm pleased to see all these fixes. However, I noticed a few breakages. They
>> come from relying on undocumented behavior, but only using the public
>> interface
Hi,
lloda skribis:
> I'm pleased to see all these fixes. However, I noticed a few breakages. They
> come from relying on undocumented behavior, but only using the public
> interface, so others might be affected. I don't propose to patch them, but
> perhaps to make a note in NEWS or (for the l
17 matches
Mail list logo
