Quoting Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Luis Zarrabeitia schrieb: > >>>> 0**0 > > 1 > > > > That 0^0 should be a nan or exception, I guess, but not 1. > > No, that's correct for floats. Read the wikipedia article or the C99 > standard for more information.
Weird, I can't find neither... (which wikipedia article? Couldn't find one about C99.) Don't take me wrong, I believe you... but I would really want to see the logic behind that. I pretty much like the NaNs and Infs (and don't really understand why python raises float division errors instead of them), but to have errors pass with absolute silence seems dangerous even if it is useful sometimes (Vandermonde example). I think I'd rather have python returning NaNs and violating C99 on the 0**0=1, than to have 0**0=1 and not return NaNs. -- Luis Zarrabeitia Facultad de Matemática y Computación, UH http://profesores.matcom.uh.cu/~kyrie -- "Al mundo nuevo corresponde la Universidad nueva" UNIVERSIDAD DE LA HABANA 280 aniversario -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
