On 2006-mar-30, at 03:23, Samium Gromoff wrote:

Apropos the built-in types section, would it make sense to replace a slightly ambiguous sentence mixing three things:

"On most systems, the :float type represents a C float and a Lisp single-float. :double represents a C double and a Lisp double-float."

with two separate sentences:

"On all systems the :float type represents a C float, :double represents a C double."

and

"On most systems, the :float type a Lisp single-float, :double represents a Lisp double-float."

Thanks for your suggestion.

On all systems, the @code{:float} and @code{:double} types represent a C @code{float} and @code{double}, respectively. On most but not all systems, @code{:float} and @code{:double} represent a Lisp @code{single-float} and @code{double-float}, respectively. It is not so useful to consider the relationship between Lisp types and C types as isomorphic, as simply to recognize the relationship, and relative precision, among each respective category.

Does this look better?