At 09:07 AM 10/8/2001 +1000, Damian Conway wrote:
>I see your (and others') point here, but I view NaN as a *marker* indicating
>a non-numeric result. Markers should always compare equal to themselves.
>(Frankly, *everything* should compare equal to itself -- which is where
>IEEE 754 goes horribly wrong.)
FWIW, I've always viewed NaN as equivalent to SQL's NULL, and treated it as
such. (Of course, proper support for either would require me to build in
three-value logic to Parrot, and I'm not sure I'm willing to go quite that
far... :)
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk
