Re: Questions about floating numbers, rethink and bug report

[Chris Cramer]

On Thu, Oct 11, 2001 at 12:45:26AM -0400, Keith Wright wrote:
> I agree that it is muddled here.  It trys to say too many things at once,
> description, and justification, and implementation.  There is a
> clearer description of the rule at the end of section 4.1.2:
> 
>      As noted in section 3.4, it is an error to alter a constant
>      (i.e. the value of a literal expression) using a mutation
>      procedure like set-car! or string-set!.

I guess they really meant that you shouldn't modify a literal, but that
an implementation may not be able to actually signal the error.

> Yes, there should be some fairly straightforward way to write Scheme
> code that ensures a vector will be represented so that C will see it
> as float [], or short int[], or whatever.  That doesn't preclude also
> choosing a compact representation automatically when the Scheme
> programmer does nothing explicit to specify the representation.

In that case, should you even need to explicitly say that it's uniform?
You may want to change the regular array code instead of the uniform
array code.

-- 
C. Ray C. aka Christopher Cramer
address@hidden
http://www.pyro.net/~crayc/