Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2a.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.068 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.86; '*S*': 0.00; 'python,': 0.02; 'anders': 0.09; "wouldn't": 0.14; 'made,': 0.16; 'nan': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'wed,': 0.18; "hasn't": 0.19; 'examples': 0.20; 'seems': 0.21; 'error': 0.23; "haven't": 0.24; 'question': 0.24; "i've": 0.25; 'asking': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'point': 0.28; 'message-id:@mail.gmail.com': 0.30; 'along': 0.30; "i'm": 0.30; 'checking': 0.33; 'beyond': 0.35; 'point.': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'received:google.com': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'really': 0.36; 'too': 0.37; 'being': 0.38; 'needed': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'pm,': 0.38; 'anything': 0.39; 'help,': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'making': 0.63; 'kind': 0.63; 'provide': 0.64; 'worth': 0.66; 'jul': 0.74; 'subject:For': 0.78; 'improvement': 0.84; 'posed': 0.84; 'joel': 0.91 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=W1HbG2kIIjkotgXXGtIvCWJt2DsPPQomKNC2u1Bv/ro=; b=RbiCnUInQj/VBpS2fWmj4iUvkWaPEIhIWzAwdLU9XF/F+gvQTAg0OSZ6uJ5AKtkre0 yVvD/jVoe/cvMxvlukwercIdYN/1som6xn5pwdV6MrTApu+P2fpzS8NBrdAKf+mBpOK+ wg0JFfYWIVi/O00JAFi4igFVTaCIVHSFIL9b0Ho62f2L8W3wb/tMFiouPl7ag0Gevd/B vAk+KomG/G/BlAd4luJOIJFj0iUZ7PNbQh9x+S/4xgBUtttv1qCazdkVb2tLd1NNRHrj gmkTX5tHHh4uqwHRbTCgsZ5UijepEtR4/TwNsSb+96va+BpyYx/5HYvMQ5V5WFIJ+un1 E4aQ== X-Received: by 10.70.127.204 with SMTP id ni12mr347603pdb.137.1404948928588; Wed, 09 Jul 2014 16:35:28 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <53BDCA33.3020100@jmunch.dk> References: <53BC05FB.4050707@jmunch.dk> <53BD70F4.4000504@stoneleaf.us> <53BDAF90.8010709@jmunch.dk> <53BDCA33.3020100@jmunch.dk> From: Ian Kelly Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 17:34:48 -0600 Subject: Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes To: Python 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 18 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1404948936 news.xs4all.nl 2897 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:57042 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:74285 On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 5:03 PM, Anders J. Munch <2014@jmunch.dk> wrote: > Joel Goldstick wrote: >> >> I've been following along here, and it seems you haven't received the >> answer you want or need. > > > So far I received exactly the answer I was expecting. 0 examples of > NaN!=NaN being beneficial. > I wasn't asking for help, I was making a point. Whether that will lead to > improvement of Python, well, I'm not too optimistic, but I feel the point > was worth making regardless. If the reason there were 0 examples is because the group that you posed the question to is lacking the kind of experience needed to be able to provide them (speaking for myself, I wouldn't know because I don't ever do anything with NaN beyond checking for it as an error condition), then the point hasn't really been made, has it?