[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: hplabs!common-lisp@su-ai.ARPA*Subject*: truncate/round/floor/ceiling functions*From*: hpfclp!paul%hplabs.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa*Date*: Mon, 25 Feb 85 13:25:26 pst*Mmdf-warning*: Parse error in preceding line at CSNET-RELAY.ARPA*Source-info*: From (or Sender) name not authenticated.

I think that I may have found an inconsistent definition for the functions floor/round/ceiling and trucate. This inconsistency occurs when there are 2 arguments. For example, let us look at `(truncate 10.0 4.0)'. 1). We see that (truncate 10.0 4.0) is defined to be equivalent to (truncate (/ 10.0 4.0)) = (truncate 2.5), which yields (2 0.5). 2.) However, applying the sentence (from pg 216 in the Aluminum Edition) "If any of these functions is given 2 arguments x and y and produces results q and r, then q*y + r = x." yields, for x=10.0 and y= 4.0, q=2 and r=2.0, or a result of (2.0 2.0). We then have 2 different results for `truncate 10.0 4.0', depending upon whether one does the division or not. How is this resolved? Any clarifications would be appreciated. Paul Beiser Hewlett-Packard Ft. Collins, Colorado uucp: ...{ihnp4,hplabs}!hpfcla!paul arpa: "hpfclp!paul%hplabs.csnet"@csnet-relay

- Prev by Date:
**gcd of rationals--flame added in proof** - Next by Date:
**truncate/round/floor/ceiling functions** - Previous by thread:
**gcd of rationals--flame added in proof** - Next by thread:
**truncate/round/floor/ceiling functions** - Index(es):