It's not like Julia is doing anything strange or uncommon here. Most people would be really surprised if -10² meant positive 100.
Den torsdagen den 18:e september 2014 kl. 15:01:44 UTC+2 skrev Jutho: > > because it is not recognized/parsed as literal but as the application of a > unary minus, which has lower precedence than ^ > > I guess it is not possible to give binary minus a lower precedence than ^ > and unary minus of higher precedence, since these are just different > methods of the same function/operator. > > Op donderdag 18 september 2014 14:54:26 UTC+2 schreef Florian Oswald: >> >> yes - not sure why -0.4 and (-0.4) are any different. >> >> On 18 September 2014 13:52, Patrick O'Leary <patrick...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Seems like the literal -0.4^2.5 should throw the same error, though? >>> >>> >>> On Thursday, September 18, 2014 6:42:56 AM UTC-5, Tim Holy wrote: >>>> >>>> http://docs.julialang.org/en/latest/manual/faq/#why-does- >>>> julia-give-a-domainerror-for-certain-seemingly-sensible-operations >>>> >>>> On Thursday, September 18, 2014 03:24:00 AM Florian Oswald wrote: >>>> > # define a variable gamma: >>>> > >>>> > gamma = 1.4 >>>> > mgamma = 1.0-gamma >>>> > >>>> > julia> mgamma >>>> > -0.3999999999999999 >>>> > >>>> > # this works: >>>> > >>>> > julia> -0.399999999999^2.5 >>>> > -0.10119288512475567 >>>> > >>>> > # this doesn't: >>>> > >>>> > julia> mgamma^2.5 >>>> > ERROR: DomainError >>>> > in ^ at math.jl:252 >>>> >>>> >>
