Re: [racket-users] not a number is a number

On 22/03/18 10:10, Tim Jervis wrote: > I was amused but not surprised, if that makes sense, and I agree that it > is clear elsewhere. > > I was thinking a few extra bytes for another example in the > documentation for number? might be worthwhile, and in the same tutorial > spirit of the comment

Re: [racket-users] not a number is a number

I was amused but not surprised, if that makes sense, and I agree that it is clear elsewhere. I was thinking a few extra bytes for another example in the documentation for number? might be worthwhile, and in the same tutorial spirit of the comment in the following entry for complex? Tim > On

Re: [racket-users] not a number is a number

I think the introduction to the "Numbers" section is fairly clear that, from Racket's perspective, +nan.0 and +nan.f are inexact real numbers: https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/numbers.html I do appreciate the irony of the names. Perhaps `(number? +nan.0)` could be added as another example

[racket-users] not a number is a number

I was amused to see (number? +nan.0) returns #t. Is it worth noting this in the documentation? https://docs.racket-lang.org/reference/number-types.html?q=number%3F#%28def._%28%28quote._~23~25kernel%29._number~3f%29%29