re: rationalize bug

[Bill Schottstaedt]

>> Rats.  I'll try to look at libguile/numbers.c soon.
> Any news on that?  :-)

No -- sorry -- my TODO list is so long, even emacs complains.

(There's a problem: the scheme spec seems to insist on the "simplest"
ratio which they define in terms of the size of the integers -- my 
rationalize used continued fractions so it's fast (worst case involves
successive fibonacci numbers, I think), but it's not always "simplest".
I think the scheme spec is silly -- this reminds me of (random 0.0)
in CL which is flagged as an error -- obviously CL-types have no idea
why you'd use random, and similarly for rationalize in scheme).