Re: NaN

From	Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu>
Subject	Re: NaN
Date	2011-04-28 17:23 -0400
References	<BANLkTine8W15e=SqNnJUStMNdy2GGA9pUA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.945.1304010112.9059.python-list@python.org> <4db9b921$0$29978$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.965.1304025907.9059.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 4/28/2011 2:59 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote:

> Still, it could be worse... I've seen a programs use 9999 to represent
> missing values, on the basis that nobody could ever have more than (say)
> 5000 invoices in the database...
>
> (I wish I was exaggerating.)

All 9s in a field for missing was once standard for Fortran programs.

-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

Thread

Re: NaN Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2011-04-28 10:01 -0700
  Re: NaN Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-04-28 18:59 +0000
    Re: NaN Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-04-28 17:23 -0400
    Re: NaN Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-28 21:56 +0000
  Re: NaN Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2011-04-28 20:39 +0000

csiph-web