Thanks Norman. Sorry for not being as clear as I might wish.
I was trying to provide an example suggesting significance divided by
difficulty often influences the design of programming languages and
libraries. For me the critique of the standard is context for the last
sentence.
The interesting
Greetings.
On 6 Feb 2018, at 13:00, ben.rudgers wrote:
"The library [math.h] doesn't try to distinguish +0 from -0. IEEE
754
worries quite
a bit about this distinction. All the architectures I mentioned
above can
represent
both flavors of zero. But I have trouble accepting (or even
Huh. Okay, thanks.
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Ben Greenman
wrote:
> Looks like its for the same reason that (number->string -0) yields "0".
>
> +nan.0 is special, but -nan.0 is the same as (- +nan.0)
>
> http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/numbers.html
>
>
(eq? +nan.0 -nan.0) -> #t
This is documented:
The datum -nan.0 refers to the same constant as +nan.0, and -nan.f is the same
as +nan.f.
Jos
_
From: racket-users@googlegroups.com [mailto:racket-users@googlegroups.com] On
Behalf Of David Storrs
Sent: martes, 06 de febrero de 2018 00:42
Not sure there should be a -nan.0 to start with. NaN is an absorbing value
that shouldn't have a sign. I suspect it's because the + is a convenience
to trigger the number reader, and then an appeal to symmetry and analogy to
+inf.0 led to -nan.0?
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 11:46 PM, Ben Greenman
Looks like its for the same reason that (number->string -0) yields "0".
+nan.0 is special, but -nan.0 is the same as (- +nan.0)
http://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/numbers.html
On Mon, Feb 5, 2018 at 6:41 PM, David Storrs wrote:
> I noticed that (number->string
6 matches
Mail list logo