Xref: utzoo comp.lang.scheme:1822 comp.lang.lisp:4016
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!ariel.unm.edu!nmsu!opus!ted
From: ted@nmsu.edu (Ted Dunning)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme,comp.lang.lisp
Subject: Re: Numerical gotcha's
Message-ID: <TED.90Nov22144145@kythera.nmsu.edu>
Date: 22 Nov 90 21:41:45 GMT
References: <431@data.UUCP>
Sender: news@NMSU.Edu
Followup-To: comp.lang.scheme
Organization: NMSU Computer Science
Lines: 26
In-reply-to: kend@data.UUCP's message of 21 Nov 90 17:10:40 GMT


In article <431@data.UUCP> kend@data.UUCP (Ken Dickey) writes:

   I am interested
   in knowing what results are obtained for the following on various
   Scheme & Lisp implementations.

in t3.1 running on a sun3 under sunos4.1, with a small change because
'-' only takes two arguments, i got

==> (define (f x y)
  (+ (* (/ 1335 4) (expt y 6))
     (* (expt x 2) 
        (- (* 11 (expt x 2) (expt y 2))
	   (+ (expt y 6)
	      (* 121 (expt y 4))
	      2)))
     (* (/ 11 2) (expt y 8))
     (/ x (* 2 y))))
F

==> (TRYIT)
-54767/66192

--
I don't think the stories are "apocryphal".  I did it :-)  .. jthomas@nmsu.edu