Re: [Python-ideas] NAN handling in the statistics module

2019-01-10 Thread Neil Girdhar
On Monday, January 7, 2019 at 3:16:07 AM UTC-5, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > (By the way, I'm not outright disagreeing with you, I'm trying to weigh > up the pros and cons of your position. You've given me a lot to think > about. More below.) > > On Sun, Jan 06, 2019 at 11:31:30PM -0800, Nathani

[Python-ideas] Fwd: NAN handling in the statistics module

2019-01-10 Thread David Mertz
> > One possible argument for making PASS the default, even if that means >> implementation-dependent behaviour with NANs, is that in the absense of a >> clear preference for FAIL or RETURN, at least PASS is backwards compatible. >> >> You might shoot yourself in the foot, but at least you know its

Re: [Python-ideas] Fwd: NAN handling in the statistics module

2019-01-10 Thread Jonathan Fine
On Thu, Jan 10, 2019 at 5:07 PM David Mertz wrote: >>> You might shoot yourself in the foot, but at least you know its the same >>> foot you shot yourself in using the previous version *wink* > I've lost attribution chain. I think this is Steven, but it doesn't really > matter. I think it was