Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
suggestion
14 views
Skip to first unread message
Ian Gay
May 4, 2012, 3:51:28 PM5/4/12
to
Would it be a good idea if [string is double -strict] returned
0 for an argument of Inf, rather than 1, which is now the case?
--
*********** To reply by e-mail, make w single in address **************
0 for an argument of Inf, rather than 1, which is now the case?
--
*********** To reply by e-mail, make w single in address **************
Robert Heller
May 4, 2012, 9:26:09 PM5/4/12
to
At Fri, 04 May 2012 12:51:28 -0700 Ian Gay <g...@sfuu.ca> wrote:
>
> Would it be a good idea if [string is double -strict] returned
> 0 for an argument of Inf, rather than 1, which is now the case?
Why should it do that? Inf is a 'valid' double (as is Nan), in a sense.
>
> Would it be a good idea if [string is double -strict] returned
> 0 for an argument of Inf, rather than 1, which is now the case?
All strict implies is that the string has a non-zero length, since an
empty string matches all types (useful to avoid nonsense errors under
certain conditions).
>
--
Robert Heller -- 978-544-6933 / hel...@deepsoft.com
Deepwoods Software -- http://www.deepsoft.com/
() ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\ www.asciiribbon.org -- against proprietary attachments
0 new messages