Front page | perl.perl6.language |
Postings from October 2001
RE: NaN semantics
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next
From:
Damian Conway
Date:
October 7, 2001 14:06
Subject:
RE: NaN semantics
Message ID:
200110072106.HAA53770@indy05.csse.monash.edu.au
> His point was that the NaN IEEE came up with is defined to have NaN !=
> NaN, and that it might be confusing if Perl's behavior wasn't consistent
> with that. Not that I think NaN != NaN is a particularly good idea, but
> consistency with other languages may be. If NaN != NaN, then his
> example is correct.
Sorry. I was focused on the Perl 6 semantics and missed that implication.
Let me make it clear: AFAIK Perl NaN's will not be IEEE 754 compliant.
That was certainly my intention in suggesting them to Larry. I share the
view of a number of other language designers that the non-self-identity
of IEEE NaN is (to slightly misquote Tim) "ugly, non-intuitive and ugly; and
non-intuitive too".
;-)
> P.S. Congratulations to you and Larry for waking up perl6-language. I
> had seen almost no traffic on it in weeks, and was starting to get a bit
> worried that thoughts on the languages were coughing, sputtering and
> dying. :^)
Just one of many eyes in Hurricane Perl, I assure you! ;-)
Damian
Thread Previous
|
Thread Next