The change is much more than substituting NaN for _. or vice versa.   
You should read the page for _. in the J6.02 qbeta.

Absolutely no plans to change 0%0 giving 0.



----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Monday, February 25, 2008 16:25
Subject: Re: [Jbeta] Use of the name 'NaN' deprecated
To: [email protected]

> I agree with Henry.
> 
> As the Dictionary reads now (and has always read since the 1991
> version), the only reference to _. is its "Indeterminate" entry
> itself, namely:
> 
> Indeterminate _.
>    The indeterminate _. results from expressions such 
> as _-_ (infinity
>    minus infinity) and from expressions (such as 3+_.) 
> in which an
>    indeterminate argument occurs.
> 
> A clarification how _. relates to = (and, by induction i. e. ~: >:
> <: etc.) is dearly missing in my opinion.   (3=_. 
> ?   _.=_. ?)
> 
> If the clarification should be that the results are "entirely
> fortuitous" [Roger's words] or "platform-dependent", that is fine
> with me, too.  I just think the rules need to be spelled out.
> (I also think it should also be made explicit that _. propagates only
> in "arithmetic expressions" as opposed to, say,  
> <_.  or  2#_. .)
> 
> I've spent enough days on making _/__/_. work on various platforms
> and am certainly aware of the close ties to IEEE 
> arithmetic.  However,
> just shelling another moniker such as "NaN" for _. in the Dictionary
> doesn't help a bit to define how _. is supposed to work.  
> If anything,
> any spurious or explicit reference to NaN or IEEE just raises further
> questions just how IEEEish J's arithmetic is supposed to be, without
> answering this either.  Just stick to the word 
> "indeterminate", as
> Henry suggests.
> 
> Beyond the references to "NaN", I have another quarrel with the
> two new foreigns:  I am missing a rank specification for these
> verbs.
> 
>                                                       Martin
> 
> PS:
> > (And the only way to deal with _. in J data is to get rid of it!)
> 
> We'd love too, but up to J Rel. 6.01 the Dictionary has been silent
> on how to do this.
> 
> PPS:  Any plans to kill off "0%0  ==> 0"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to