Han-Wen Nienhuys <hanw...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:41 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >>>> +nan.0 appears fine for that. But can we rely on it being available on >>>> supported platforms? I don't find it in the sources of Lilypond, though >>> >>> It sounds a bit fishy especially since alterations are normally >>> rational numbers. Why not use a non-number value to signify this? >>> Maybe #f ? >> >> Because alterations are compared using `=' which bombs out on `#f' >> (which was actually my first attempt). > > I'm without context, but maybe the code should look at the comparands > before comparing?
Sure. Just means I have to analyze and touch more code. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
