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

*To*: COMMON-LISP@SU-AI*Subject*: Coercion rule for comparisons*From*: Rem@IMSSS*Date*: Thu, 26 Mar 1987 21:14:00 -0000

Perhaps the rule for binary (two-arg) comparison should be first coerced to least-accurate (a la arithmetic) to see if they can be distinguished (shown non-equal) at that level of precision. If so, we can immediately answer the pending question at minimal cost. If they look equal at least precision, then coerce the other way (most precision) to get a definitive result. If that were the rule for binary comparisons, would transitivity then hold for all the standard comparison operations except not-equal? -------

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Numerical Comparison: "required coercions"** - Next by Date:
**NMAP** - Previous by thread:
**Extension to MAP [if the shoe doesn't fit?]** - Next by thread:
**NMAP** - Index(es):