On Sat, Sep 5, 2020 at 7:26 PM Greg Ewing <email@example.com> wrote:_______________________________________________On 6/09/20 8:08 am, David Mertz wrote:
> The only real goal I've seen is that you hope that `x == eval(repr(x))`
> for floating point numbers. But that is doomed to failure since it
> cannot work for NaN by its very definition.
I think that just means the definition needs a bit more finesse.
It would be a reasonable goal for it to give back *some* NaN
with the same flags and payload as the original.Sure, but we have that already:>>> from math import inf, nan
>>> eval(repr([42, nan, inf]))
[42, nan, inf]The only difference is the `math` namespace vs `builtins` namespace.--The dead increasingly dominate and strangle both the living and the
not-yet born. Vampiric capital and undead corporate persons abuse
the lives and control the thoughts of homo faber. Ideas, once born,
become abortifacients against new conceptions.
Python-ideas mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send an email to email@example.com
Message archived at https://firstname.lastname@example.org/message/HP5R24IXRL5LST3OQWWNNTALHLUCIVUN/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/