On page16 of the above book, it show (- 1.5 1/2) returning 1.0. When I do such in Gambit, I get:Gambit v4.7.3
(+ 1/2 1/2)
1
(- 1.5 1/2)
1. Here are some other results:Chicken Scheme#;1> (- 1.5 1/2)
Warning: cannot represent exact fraction - coerced to flonum: "1/2" 1. #;2> RacketC:\Users\Steve>racket Welcome to Racket v6.0.1.
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
LarcenyLarceny v0.97 "Funny in the Head" (Aug 19 2009 14:35:39, precise:Win32:unified)
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
MIT Scheme(- 1.5 1/2);Value: 1. Petite Chez Scheme> (- 1.5 1/2) 1.0
SCM 5e7> (- 1.5 1/2) 1.0
Why is there such a variety? Steve
Afficher les réponses par date
Both 1.0 and 1. are acceptable ways in scheme for writing the same number.
To convince yourself that it is the same number you can try: (eqv? 1.0 1.)
On Tue, Dec 30, 2014 at 9:07 PM, Steve Graham jsgrahamus@yahoo.com wrote:
On page16 of the above book, it show (- 1.5 1/2) returning 1.0.
When I do such in Gambit, I get: Gambit v4.7.3
(+ 1/2 1/2)
1
(- 1.5 1/2)
Here are some other results: Chicken Scheme #;1> (- 1.5 1/2)
Warning: cannot represent exact fraction - coerced to flonum: "1/2"
#;2>
Racket C:\Users\Steve>racket Welcome to Racket v6.0.1.
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
Larceny Larceny v0.97 "Funny in the Head" (Aug 19 2009 14:35:39, precise:Win32:unified)
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
MIT Scheme (- 1.5 1/2) ;Value: 1.
Petite Chez Scheme
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
SCM 5e7
(- 1.5 1/2)
1.0
Why is there such a variety?
Steve
Gambit-list mailing list Gambit-list@iro.umontreal.ca https://webmail.iro.umontreal.ca/mailman/listinfo/gambit-list
-
Pierpaolo Bernardi -
Steve Graham