Alexander Belopolsky <belopol...@users.sourceforge.net> added the comment:
On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 3:18 PM, Mark Dickinson <rep...@bugs.python.org> wrote: > > Mark Dickinson <dicki...@gmail.com> added the comment: > >> Table 5.2 referenced above lists 10 operations, four of which (>, <, >> >=, and <=) are given spellings that are identical to the spellings of >> Python comparison operators. > > Yep, those are included amongst the "various ad-hoc and traditional names and > symbols". So what? > It's still the case that IEEE 754 gives no requirement (or even > recommendation) for how either of > 'compareQuietLess' or 'compareSignalingLess' should be spelt in any > particular language. IEEE 754 is not a standard that is directly applicable to the design of programming languages. For example, it is completely silent on the issue of which operations should be implemented as infix operators and which as functions. Still, to the extent it is appropriate for IEEE 754 to say so, I think it says that '<' is 'compareSignalingLess'. IEEE 754 can only be a guide for language design and not a specification. However, the decimal module, which was explicitly designed for IEEE 754 compliance, makes order comparison operators signaling. What is the reason to make them quiet for floats other than backward compatibility? Note that backward compatibility is likely not to be an issue if we make nan comparisons generate a warning (possibly even off by default) rather than error. ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue11949> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
