On Fri, 21 May 2004 15:21:09 -0400 "Tim Peters" tim.one@comcast.net wrote:
[Armin Rigo]
[..]
NaN comparison is a red herring not only because Python doesn't have a sane story in any area involving NaNs, but also because the 32 possible 754 comparison predicates can't be mapped onto 6 operator symbols. Note that in C99, the infix C relational operators raise an exception (754's "invalid operation") when applied to a NaN, and C99 adds a pile of new macros for non-exceptional NaN comparison (my favorite is the fetchingly named"islessgreater(x, y)" -- which "is similar to (x) < (y) || (x) > (y); however, islessgreater(x,y) does not raise the invalid exception when x and y are unordered (nor does it evaluate x and y twice)").
Finally, a use for <>. Barry will be so happy ;^)
-Casey
On Friday 21 May 2004 03:46 pm, Barry Warsaw wrote:
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 15:37, Casey Duncan wrote:
Finally, a use for <>. Barry will be so happy ;^)
And Just, and Fred.
No, no, no. "<>" is a misapplication of pointy brackets. Note that there's nothing in the middle; what's the point of bracketing if there's nothing to bracket?
The inequality operator should be spelled "!=", mostly so it's not confused with the structured-bracketing operation.
-Fred
On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 16:07, Fred Drake wrote:
No, no, no. "<>" is a misapplication of pointy brackets. Note that there's nothing in the middle; what's the point of bracketing if there's nothing to bracket?
The inequality operator should be spelled "!=", mostly so it's not confused with the structured-bracketing operation.
Okay, Fred's out. He gets to rewrite the Windows installer in XML.
most-people-are-wrong-ly y'rs, -Barry
participants (3)
-
Barry Warsaw -
Casey Duncan -
Fred Drake