This site is a static rendering of the Trac instance that was used by R7RS-WG1 for its work on R7RS-small (PDF), which was ratified in 2013. For more information, see Home.
# Source for wiki NegativeRationalize version 1

## author

cowan

## comment

## ipnr

127.11.51.1

## name

NegativeRationalize

## readonly

0

## text

The correct value of `(rationalize 20 1)` is 19, because 19/1 is the simplest rational that differs from 20 by an amount no more than 1. But it is not clear what the value of `(rationalize 20 -1)` should be. Is it also 19, or should an error be signaled?
`(rationalize 20 1)` => 19 and `(rationalize 20 -1)` => 19: Racket, MIT, Chicken with the numbers egg, Scheme48/scsh, Guile, Kawa, SISC, Chez, Vicare, Larceny, Ypsilon, Mosh, !IronScheme, STklos, KSi, S7, Sagittarius, Foment, Chibi
`(rationalize 20 1)` => 19 but `(rationalize 20 -1)` signals an error: Gauche, Gambit
`rationalize` unsupported: Chicken, Bigloo, Detroit, Stalin, Scheme->C, SCM, NexJ, JScheme, !SigScheme, Shoe, Mini-Scheme, !TinyScheme, Scheme 9, RScheme, Unlikely, SIOD, BDC, XLisp, Rep, Schemik, Llava, Sizzle, !FemtoLisp, Dfsch, Inlab, Picrin
`(rationalize 20 1)` => 20 and `(rationalize 20 -1)` => 20: UMB, SXM, Owl Lisp
Note that for a procedure that's been in the language since R2RS there are a remarkable number of Schemes that don't support it. I suspect this is because implementers assume that if they don't support arbitrary exact ratnums there is no point in implementing `rationalize`, though its arguments can be either exact or inexact.

## time

2016-07-01 13:31:29

## version

1