Re: "cannot coerce inexact literal to fixnum"

On 2024-02-10 02:42, Al wrote:

> ... if I enable fixnum, csc chokes on both the third and fourth 
> display's with: "Error: cannot coerce inexact literal `2147483647' to 
> fixnum". It compiles and runs fine if those lines are commented out 
> (or if fixnum is disabled).

So the error comes from a check for (big-fixnum?) in 
chicken-core/core.scm. It is defined in chicken-core/support.scm:

  (define (big-fixnum? x) ;; XXX: This should probably be in c-platform
     (and (fixnum? x)
          (feature? #:64bit)
          (or (fx> x 1073741823)
          (fx< x -1073741824) ) ) )

   (define (small-bignum? x) ;; XXX: This should probably be in c-platform
     (and (bignum? x)
          (not (feature? #:64bit))
          (fx<= (integer-length x) 62) ) )

Maybe the condition in big-fixnum should be negated? Apply the 
restrictive #x3fffffff limit only when NOT (feature? #:64bit) ?


Also, I've looked at Ken's number-limits egg. It has


#define MOST_POSITIVE_INT32 ((int32_t) 0x3fffffffL)


I don't know why this (as opposed to 0x7fffffff) would apply to #:64bit 
installs..? In any case the documentation on call-cc.org says

* most-negative-integer32
Smallest negative int32_t value
* most-positive-integer32
Largest negative (sic!) int32_t value


... which is ALSO wrong for most-positive-integer32 , but it does refers 
to int32_t, as opposed to chicken's internal representation (which uses 
up an extra bit.)