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

*To*: Common-Lisp@su-ai*Subject*: Functions for taking apart floating-point numbers*From*: David A. Moon <Moon%SCRC-TENEX%MIT-MC@SU-DSN>*Date*: Sat, 04 Jun 1983 03:50:00 -0000*In-reply-to*: The message of 3 Jun 83 14:47-EDT from Robert A. Cassels <Cassels at SCRC-TENEX>

Date: Friday, 3 June 1983, 14:47-EDT From: Robert A. Cassels <Cassels at SCRC-TENEX> Proposal: Remove @f[float-exponent] and @f[float-integer-exponent], and return those numbers as the second values from @f[float-significand] and @f[float-integer-significand]. I think this was turned down last year, but I don't remember why. It sounds reasonable to me, except that one would probably want to choose better names for the two functions. I'm in favor of it. Proposal: Add new functions @f[float-digits] and @f[float-precision]. I don't understand the need for both of these. It sounds like float-precision is the only one you actually need; float-digits returns the same answer except for certain exceptional numbers. Proposal: Require the result of @f[float-integer-significand] to reflect the precision of the floating-point number. This sounds reasonable. The main competing proposal is that it return a result "normalized to the right" by removing trailing zeros. Your proposal seems slightly preferable to that. Proposal: Clarify the result of @f[(float-sign 0.0)], @f[(float-sign -0.0)]. I think this is just a clarification, since the manual indicates that float-sign with one argument never returns zero even if the argument is zero.

- Prev by Date:
**Destructuring** - Next by Date:
**Re: typep of array** - Previous by thread:
**Functions for taking apart floating-point numbers** - Next by thread:
**Ballot A** - Index(es):