Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!xlned.com!feeder7.xlned.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed1.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
Return-Path	<ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
X-Original-To	python-list@python.org
Delivered-To	python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status	OK 0.017
X-Spam-Evidence	'H': 0.97; 'S': 0.00; 'algorithm': 0.04; 'binary': 0.07; 'problem:': 0.07; 'anders': 0.09; 'fixed,': 0.09; 'function,': 0.09; 'python': 0.11; 'bug': 0.12; '2.7': 0.14; 'equivalence': 0.16; 'nan': 0.16; 'unequal': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; '(but': 0.19; '>>>': 0.22; 'platforms': 0.22; 'import': 0.22; '(in': 0.22; 'issue.': 0.22; 'convenient': 0.24; 'fraction': 0.24; 'tells': 0.24; 'compare': 0.26; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'testing': 0.29; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'that.': 0.31; 'decimal': 0.31; 'class': 0.32; 'cases': 0.33; 'implemented': 0.33; 'test': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'doubt': 0.36; 'false': 0.36; 'expected': 0.38; 'to:addr:python- list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'bad': 0.39; 'sure': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'changed': 0.39; 'ian': 0.60; 'you.': 0.62; 'provide': 0.64; 'news': 0.67; 'between': 0.67; 'integrity': 0.74; 'jul': 0.74; 'subject:For': 0.78; 'everything,': 0.84; 'itself?': 0.84; 'regard.': 0.84; 'relation.': 0.84
DKIM-Signature	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; bh=5El9I+LzhrzYJhR/kgGCAceiRZMWjnp+RM6N7nFokKg=; b=STogadmwGaDDxHs1l/BvaIxv2xYza+IHV8AwvvLC2QNUxKYjUCD77Jw4Ipoyh2l0QC GVqeZi70uGvbAfHsYPSWobRZmEW13O+lnPnfZv7pZ6BbH/LpFfeXRjdFryvKHBrWpKCC p5SK0eqzdb3RquwjMb+4RsBQRscS/gMsR7vUDpr5HwUj3kF29YPI/101KyebyCJLaiH9 xyU/T9rPkr4kC8Ys7jlyN/rEp3VbDJsVuIvfD/DYZu05OXBwvWwhPIeZWmgKjiuqAJMi jQrj8HCoQjQyvXacs9iLm++lj4xPR48uZ+KenDHLqeBYG+Dob3gP4sl5O3HTYc018Hjm sYNg==
X-Received	by 10.70.126.130 with SMTP id my2mr7099426pdb.124.1404849492282; Tue, 08 Jul 2014 12:58:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version	1.0
In-Reply-To	<53BC3E4E.3020707@jmunch.dk>
References	<53BC05FB.4050707@jmunch.dk> <CALwzidmaydzopkedzxM-dNk8uNvT57YLSR32-H_AEN4AC1-wrw@mail.gmail.com> <53BC3E4E.3020707@jmunch.dk>
From	Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com>
Date	Tue, 8 Jul 2014 13:57:30 -0600
Subject	Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes
To	Python <python-list@python.org>
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-BeenThere	python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version	2.1.15
Precedence	list
List-Id	General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe	<https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive	<http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post	<mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help	<mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe	<https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.11660.1404849501.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines	44
NNTP-Posting-Host	2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace	1404849501 news.xs4all.nl 2904 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:53343
X-Complaints-To	abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:74209

Show key headers only | View raw

On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Anders J. Munch <2014@jmunch.dk> wrote:
>
> Ian Kelly wrote:
>>
>> As far as I know nothing changed between 2.4 and 2.7 in this regard.
>> Python has always had NaN compare unequal to everything, per the
>> standard.
>
> It might have been platform-specific in 2.4.

I doubt it, but okay, which platform?

>> Okay, here's your problem: there isn't just one binary representation
>> for NaN.
>
> I'm fully aware of that. Whether NaN's are one equivalence class or several
> is not the issue. What matters is the integrity of the equivalence relation.

I have some bad news for you.  This is on Python 2.7.6:

>>> from decimal import Decimal
>>> from fractions import Fraction
>>> Decimal(2) == 2
True
>>> 2 == Fraction(2)
True
>>> Decimal(2) == Fraction(2)
False

I'm not sure exactly when this bug was fixed, but it works as expected in 3.4.0.

>> Following the standard isn't a good reason itself?
>
> If a standard tells you to jump of a cliff...

So I don't know of a good use case for nan != nan in Python (but
really I'm not the one to ask), but I do know of use cases in other
scenarios.  On platforms that don't provide an isnan() function, the
only convenient and efficient way to test for nan is by testing
reflexivity: x != x.

Following the standard means that any algorithm that uses this trick
can (in theory) be implemented in Python without changes.

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-08 13:57 -0600
  Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-07-09 01:04 +0000

csiph-web