On 8/10/2012 9:32 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 8/10/2012 9:01 PM, F i L wrote:
I had a debate on here a few months ago about the merits of default-to-NaN and
others brought up similar situations. but since we can write:
float z = float.nan;
...
That is a good solution, but in my experience programmers just throw in an =0,
as it is simple and fast, and they don't normally think about NaN's.
Let me amend that. I've never seen anyone use float.nan, or whatever NaN is in
the language they were using. They always use =0. I doubt that yelling at them
will change anything.
