Re: Why 'inexact' and 'exact' doesn't check 'number?' first?

[Daniel Hartwig]

On 12 December 2012 11:21, Nala Ginrut <address@hidden> wrote:
> It's weird to see that:
> (exact? 'a)
> ================err msg===============
> ERROR: In procedure exact?:
> ERROR: In procedure exact?: Wrong type argument in position 1: a
> ==================end=================
>
> And I have to do this:
> (define (fraction? obj)
>   (and (number? obj) (inexact? obj)))

“Fraction” is not a very precise term or relevent to the type
hierarchy in Scheme, please do not use that.  Disregard that GOOPS
define such a class, the more precise term is “rational” for which
there is already a predicate.

Your fraction? predicate is not equivalent to the GOOPS <fraction>
class, which are exact? and (in all cases I believe) also rational?.

>
>
> Why not 'exact?' and 'inexact?' doesn't check 'number?' first?

Performance. They are intended to be used in numerical paths and
requiring them to check first number? every time is very inefficient.
You will note that they are documented as “exact? Z“ rather than
“exact? obj”.