Re: [Maxima-discuss] +-Inf and NaN

[Camm Maguire]

Greetings!

Henry Baker <hbaker1@pipeline.com> writes:

> Re:
>
> Lisp arithmetic should be compatible with IEEE float arithmeticFor
> various interpretations of 'float' and/or 'arithmetic' ?There was a
> reason why Maclisp used a separate function namefor float arithmetic
> functions, and it wasn't just to speedup float arithmetic.

> The real reason is that *floats don't adhere to standard algebraic
> axioms*.

> 1.  Float addition isn't associative.

> 2.  Float addition isn't necessarily commutative -- e.g., when
> utilizing accumulation HW.

Oof....  I had no idea this was so bad.  I don't see how we can reason
about real numbers without relying on their constituting a field.

I'd be particularly interested in your opinion on the two alternatives I
set out in separate email, given how I've based GCL's type system on
your paper :-)

Take care,
-- 
Camm Maguire                                        camm@maguirefamily.org
==========================================================================
"The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah