Steven D'Aprano added the comment: Even though I agree with closing this issue, there is some support for ignoring certain "missing values" when calculating min() and max(). The draft 2008 revision of IEEE-754 includes two functions maxNum and minNum which silently skip over NANs:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_754_revision#min_and_max The R language also supports max and min skipping over missing values: https://stat.ethz.ch/R-manual/R-devel/library/base/html/Extremes.html The problem is that there are so many different things which somebody might want to do, it is hard to tell which (if any) the built-ins should support: - silently skip over None - or NANs - or treat some other, user-specified, value as "missing" - treat None as the smallest (or largest) value - treat the presence of None as an error - etc. I think that min() and max() should continue to be relatively simple-minded and let users write their own more complex versions if needed, e.g. by calling min(filter(condition, values)). ---------- nosy: +steven.daprano _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue22979> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
