Re: paper-defaults-init.ly questions

[Carl Sorensen]

On 12/3/10 8:06 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Mark Polesky <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> David Kastrup wrote:
>>>>     mm = #1.0
>>>>     cm = #(* 10 mm)
>>>>     in = #(* 25.4 mm)
>>>>     pt = #(/ in 72.27)
>>> 
>>> Wouldn't pt = #(/ (* 2540 mm) 7227) have smaller absolute
>>> error?  The current definition of pt has to round 25.4 to
>>> the nearest presentable number, 72.27 to the nearest
>>> presentable number, and then round the result of the
>>> division again.
>> 
>> No, I don't think so.  Isn't scheme a little smarter than
>> that?
> 
> No, it isn't.
> 
>> Consider the following:
>> 
>> $ guile
>> guile> (define mm 1.0)
>> guile> (define in (* 25.4 mm))
>> guile> (define pt (/ in 72.27))
>> guile> (equal? pt (/ (* 2540 mm) 7227))
>> #t
> 
> Platform dependent luck.

We can define all of these as exact quantities:

guile> (define mm 1)
guile> (define cm (* 10 mm))
guile> (define in (* 254 (/ mm 10)))
guile> (define pt (/ (* 100 in) 7227))
guile> (exact? mm)
#t
guile> (exact? cm)
#t
guile> (exact? in)
#t
guile> (exact? pt)
#t



Thanks,

Carl