On Mon, 06 Jun 2011 00:55:18 +0000, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > And thus we come back full circle. Hundreds of words, and I'm still no > closer to understanding why you think that "NAN == NAN" should be an > error.
Well, you could try improving your reading comprehension. Counselling might help. AFAICT, your main problem is that you can't distinguish between not agreeing with a particular argument and being unable to even recognise the existence of the argument. A really big clue is here: > why you think that "NAN == NAN" should be an error Given that my very first comment in the thread was: > > Wrong. > > That's overstating it. There's a good argument to be made for ... I never said that it /should/ be an error, and later explicitly stated that I wasn't arguing for it but pointing out that it's /arguable/. But you appear unable to comprehend such distinctions. Don't agree with the argument, don't accept the argument, don't recognise that there is an argument; these all appear to be the same thing. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list