Re: [Chicken-users] mathematical oddities

[Peter Bex]

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 11:49:34AM -0700, Shawn Rutledge wrote:
> (which I'm not sure is the best way, I just wrote it late last night)
> (and that was before I googled and discovered the Douglas-Peucker line
> simplification algo, which is what I really want)
> 
> But flonums continue to exist after you do (use numbers) so why should
> the behavior change suddenly?

Because flonums are no longer used as a poor substitute for large
integral numbers :)

However, it does make sense to keep the same semantics for flonums, so
I'll change this in numbers unless anyone disagrees.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth