Il giorno 3 agosto 2022, alle ore 13:36, Damien Mattei
ha scritto:
>On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 12:59 PM Maxime Devos wrote:
>>
>> (My unverified hypothesis on why you aren't seeing an error here.)
>>
>>
>> it would be a big change and very strange :-O if the few lines of code
>below in scheme ret
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:27 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Andy Wingo writes:
>
> If the Scheme standard states that
>
> (and (pair? x) (not (eq? (car x) (car x
>
> can return #t in a conforming implementation, that means that the
> standard failed to do its job for weeding out implementations w
On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:59, Stefan Israelsson Tampe
wrote:
> Somewhere in the program I have,
>
> (pk x)
> (pk (caar l))
> (pk (equal? x (caar l)))
>
> It outputs
>
> ;;; (number)
>
> ;;; (number)
>
> ;;; (#f)
>
>
>
> #f is there more to this then meets the eye?
You will get more signific
On Wed, Feb 2, 2011 at 02:53, Nelson H. F. Beebe wrote:
> Another recent book addresses arithmetic and the computation of
> elementary functions in software arbitrary-precision arithmetic:
>
> @String{pub-CAMBRIDGE = "Cambridge University Press"}
> @String{pub-CAMBRIDGE:adr = "Cam
