The existing patch and tests are coded to behave like this so those should be good. I added our discussion to the ticket for historical purposes. I don't have to do anything more from here on so I will wait for the final decision.
Thanks, Farhan On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 4:41 AM, Russell Keith-Magee <freakboy3...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 10:18 AM, thebitguru <fah...@gmail.com> wrote: > > OK, here is what I have gathered about the databases listed under > > DATABASE_ENGINE [4]. > > > > Postgresql 8: Supports all three, +/-Inf and NaN [0] > > MySQL: No support for either NaN or Inf [1] > > sqlite3: No support for either NaN or Inf [2] > > Oracle: Supports all three [3] > > > > So, we have a 50/50 split. What do you say? > > Combine the complete absence of support in SQLite and MySQL with my > previous comment about the nonsensical nature of NaN and Inf as user > inputs, and my gut reaction is that NaN and Inf should be rejected as > invalid inputs. I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, though. > > Yours, > Russ Magee %-) > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Django developers" group. > To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<django-developers%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups.com> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en. > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
