Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #74285 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-07-09 17:34 -0600 |
| Last post | 2014-07-09 17:34 -0600 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2014-07-09 17:34 -0600
| From | Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-09 17:34 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes |
| Message-ID | <mailman.11718.1404948936.18130.python-list@python.org> |
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?
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web