Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes

Date	2014-07-08 20:54 +0200
From	"Anders J. Munch" <2014@jmunch.dk>
Organization	.
Subject	Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes
References	<53BC05FB.4050707@jmunch.dk> <CALwzidmaydzopkedzxM-dNk8uNvT57YLSR32-H_AEN4AC1-wrw@mail.gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.11652.1404845648.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

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.

> 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.

> Following the standard isn't a good reason itself? 

If a standard tells you to jump of a cliff...

regards, Anders

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

Thread

Re: NaN comparisons - Call For Anecdotes "Anders J. Munch" <2014@jmunch.dk> - 2014-07-08 20:54 +0200

csiph-web