Re: [Chicken-users] From inexact to exact using the "-" procedure?

[Jeronimo Pellegrini]

On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 09:28:07PM +0100, Peter Bex wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2012 at 04:37:06PM -0300, Jeronimo Pellegrini wrote:
> > Well, that's supposed to be exactly the same thing,
> > so why is it exact? Is this an optimization?
> 
> It's a bug.  There are many, many bugs in the current release
> of the numbers egg.  I'm working hard on a new release, which
> should be done soonish.
> 
> In the meanwhile, could you please use numbers trunk?  It would
> be very helpful to actually have users testing it before I make
> yet another broken release :)

Yes, I've just installed it.

> Quoting from another mail I posted to chicken-hackers yesterday:
> "I know these fixes have been a long time coming, and I'm sorry that it's
> taking so long, however I hope to tag a new "numbers" release soonish.
> There have been many many bugs fixed in this new version, and it will
> include (*limited*) support for extended number syntax in _compiled_ code.
> 
> Along with this, it will include a types database to support
> scrutiny/specialization so that at least for flonum operations things
> will be as fast as core Chicken, and it will help to find bugs in code
> much easier when compiling.  Thanks to Felix for pushing me to support
> this and developing the initial types database!

That's great news! :-)

Thanks for your explanation, and for pointing me to the svn
trunk version of the egg!

J.