Sturla Molden wrote: > Why not raise an exception when NaN is evaluated in a boolean > context? bool(NaN) has no obvious interpretation, so it should be > considered an error.
+1 Though there is clearly a lot of legacy around this, so maybe it's best to follow C convention (sigh). Bruce Southey wrote: > Also, I think that conversion to an integer should be an error for > all of these because there is no equivalent representation of these > floating point numbers as integers and I think that using zero for > NaN is wrong. +1 A silent wrong conversion is MUCH worse than an exception! As for MATLAB, it was entirely doubles for a long time -- I don't think it's a good example of well thought-out float<->integer interactions. > Now for the other two special representations, I would presume that > Numpy's PZERO (positive zero) and NZERO (negative zero) are treated > as nothing. Conversion to integer for these should be zero. +1 > Note this defines the min/max behavior: > > * |min(x,NaN) = min(NaN,x) = x| * |max(x,NaN) = max(NaN,x) = x| nice -- it's nice to have these defined -- of course, who knows how long it will be (never?) before compilers/libraries support this. -Chris -- Christopher Barker, Ph.D. Oceanographer Emergency Response Division NOAA/NOS/OR&R (206) 526-6959 voice 7600 Sand Point Way NE (206) 526-6329 fax Seattle, WA 98115 (206) 526-6317 main reception chris.bar...@noaa.gov _______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion