[Jeff Epler]
> Thanks for reminding me that this all varies from machine to machine.
> I guess that what I was trying to say in my message is this:
>
> On my platform, I get the same result. Here's why.
>
> The term "unordered" came from me reading an x86 architecture
> reference and trying to use the same words the grown-ups use.
That manual got "unordered" from the IEEE-754 floating point standard, and
it's a fine word to use. The problem is that the 754 standard (which also
goes under a number of different names now) has no defined relationship to
the C89 standard, so when talking about C code it doesn't matter at all what
the 754 standard says: "unordered" just isn't a C89 concept. 754 does have
a defined relationship to the newer C99 standard.
> It's too bad you can get infinity and nan other than by using
> float('os-specific mumbo-jumbo'), because if that weren't the case we
> could just force Python's syntax for floating-point literals on the
> argument to float(), never passing it to the platform atof() if it
> doesn't conform. That would, uh, completely solve all problems python
> programmers ever encounter with floats.
It would be easier to just remove floats from Python for 2.4 <wink>.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4