On Sat, Aug 28, 2021, 8:34 AM Stephen J. Turnbull < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
David Mertz, Ph.D. writes:
NANs do not necessarily represent missing data.
I think in the context of `stats` they do. But this is color of
bikeshed, and I defer to you, of course.
I have a distribution for you: Cauchy. :-)
Oh? Because NaN is the *result* of `stats.variance(cauchy)`?
It still seems like as INPUTS to a stats function NaN ~= missing.