Re: [Chicken-users] <inexact> and <exact>

[Felix Winkelmann]

On Tue, 10 Aug 2004 20:38:54 -0500, Alex Shinn <address@hidden> wrote:

> At Tue, 10 Aug 2004 17:40:24 -0400 (EDT), Daniel B. Faken wrote:
> >   I am working with a C++ library which has methods that take a  
> > 'double'.
> >   Using declare(full_specialization, yes) I can get TinyCLOS to  
> > recognize
> > method calls when the parameter is of the form 1.0001, but not if it is
> > just '1' - I get an error looking for an <exact> method.
> >   This seems supported by R5RS saying that exactly one of exact? and
> > inexact? is true, but how can I get my methods to recognized exact  
> > numbers
> > as well?  (I don't really want to define an <exact> case for each one..)
> >
> >   I'm using today's CVS version (thanks for implementing ref's!), and  
> > the
> > docs say that <exact> and <inexact> are disjoint subclasses of <number>.
>
> How about using <number>?
>
> (define-method (add (x <number>) (y <number>))
>   (+ x y))

Yes, but the problem here is that the method-definition is generated
by the FFI parser in this case.


cheers,
felix