[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Robert Dewar) wrote on 07.03.05 in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Ronny Peine wrote: > > > Sorry for this, maybe i should sleep :) (It's 2 o'clock here) > > But as i know of 0^0 is defined as 1 in every lecture i had so far. > > Were these math classes, or CS classes. Let's just say that this didn't happen in any of the German math classes I ever took, school or uni. This is in fact a classic example of this type of behaviour. > Generally when you have a situation like this, where the value of > the function is different depending on how you approach the limit, > you prefer to simply say that the function is undefined at that > point. And that's how it was always taught to me. This is, of course, a different question from what a library should implement ... though I must say if I were interested in NaNs at all for a given problem, I'd be disappointed by any such library that didn't return a NaN for 0^0, and of any language standard saying so - I'd certainly consider a result of 1 wrong in the general case. MfG Kai
