On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 11:20 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 20:22, Charles R Harris
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 4:28 PM, Robert Kern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 17:13, Charles R Harris
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 3:52 PM, Charles R Harris
> >> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi All,
> >> >>
> >> >> I've been cleaning up the ufunc loops and the sign function currently
> >> >> doesn't have a defined behavior for nans. This makes the results
> depend
> >> >> on
> >> >> the order/type of comparisons in the code, which looks fragile to me.
> >> >> So
> >> >> what should it return? I vote for nan but am open for suggestions.
> >> >
> >> > And while we're at it, lets decide how to treat max/min when nans are
> >> > involved. Or should we just say the behavior is undefined.
> >>
> >> When feasible, I would like float(s)->float functions to return NaN
> >> when given a NaN as an argument. At least as the main versions of the
> >> function. Specific NaN-ignoring functions can also be introduced, but
> >> as separate functions. I don't know what exactly to do about
> >> float->int functions (e.g. argmin). I also don't know how these should
> >> interact with the current seterr() state.
> >
> > OK, maximum, minimum, and sign now return NaN.
>
> Oops!
>
> F.9.9.2 The fmax functions
> 1 If just one argument is a NaN, the fmax functions return the other
> argument (if both arguments are NaNs, the functions return a NaN).
> 2 The body of the fmax function might be
> {return (isgreaterequal(x, y) ||
> isnan(y)) ? x : y; }
>
> If we want to follow C99 semantics rather than our own
> NaN-always-propagates semantics, then we should do this instead.
>
That would have the virtue that amax/amin would return the actual max and
min of the non nan numbers. Unless all of them were nans, in which case we
would get the starting value, which should probabably be nan in this case ;)
Hey, that would work nicely.
So, I think I should use the comparison macros for the floats. However, if I
read correctly, they don't raise exceptions. Would that be a problem?
Chuck
_______________________________________________
Numpy-discussion mailing list
Numpy-discussion@scipy.org
http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
