🚀 go-pugleaf

R. Kym Horsell writes:

	There are some real numbers which can't be represented in floating
	point. The language (nor implementation) is not at fault.  For example,
	try to write down the representation of 0.1 (decimal) in binary.

This cliche doesn't apply to Iverson's problem.  Free-format output should
print no more digits than are needed to communicate the value.  For example,
with IEEE double precision floating point, the closest representable number to
8.1 is X = 8.0999999999999996447286321199499070644378662109375.  But when I
print X in free format, I should see just "8.1", because it's much shorter
and communicates X equally well.  For more on this subject, see:

	William D Clinger
	How to Read Floating Point Numbers Accurately
	Sigplan notices 25, 6 (June 1990), 92-101.

	Guy L. Steele Jr. and Jon L White
	How to Print Floating-Point Numbers Accurately
	Sigplan notices 25, 6 (June 1990), 112-126.

Perhaps Quintus's problem is that they've stolen some low order bits of the
fraction for Prolog tag bits, but their I/O routines are the same as C's and
are thus programmed as if the low order bits were significant.