Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #74287 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2014-07-09 16:17 -0700 |
| Last post | 2014-07-09 16:17 -0700 |
| 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 Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> - 2014-07-09 16:17 -0700
| From | Ethan Furman <ethan@stoneleaf.us> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2014-07-09 16:17 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes |
| Message-ID | <mailman.11719.1404949930.18130.python-list@python.org> |
On 07/09/2014 04:03 PM, Anders J. Munch 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. python-list (in whichever from you interact with it) is in no way specialized, yet you are asking for a highly specialized bit of information. > 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. The only point you have made is that no-one here uses them much. You could just as easily ask how many of us use lead-alloy to shield our in-home nuclear reactors to get the same answer. On the other hand, if you go and ask on the numpy and simpy and whatever-math-or-science-py lists there are, and get affirmative answers from them that yeah, NaN != NaN is just a huge pain and everyone is working around it, then brought that information back here -- well, then you will have made the point that you want to make. -- ~Ethan~
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web