By definition NaN never equals any other number, including NaN itself, so
isn't it a perfectly valid scenario to generate double NaNs?
(Note: I've not used spec yet, so correct me if I'm completely off track)
Am Montag, 7. November 2016 23:07:14 UTC+1 schrieb Alex Miller:
>
> I think it would be
As alpeware already said, *.read* will not return [1024, 0, 1024, 201, -1]
because
it will not return a zero unless *buffer-size* is zero.
This bit of the Java-Doc: If the length of b is zero, then no bytes are
read and 0 is returned;
So if the check is changed to (<= 0 size), passing a *buffer
for some
>> reason that the implementation guaranteed this. (I have not looked at the
>> implementation to know either way.)
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 9:21 PM 'Dirk Wetzel' via Clojure <
>> clo...@googlegroups.com > wrote:
>>
&g
Hey everyone! :)
I was recently looking at the source for *get-in* to check if it would exit
early as soon as a key was not present in the nested maps.
The source for quick reference:
(defn get-in
"Returns the value in a nested associative structure,
where ks is a sequence of keys. Returns n
I had actually included a suggestion for a predefined sentinel like this in
an earlier draft of my post. I scrapped that bit though, because I could
not measure any consistent performance benefit on my machine, aside from
not allocating a new Object each time.
Am Donnerstag, 12. Dezember 2019 1
