wren ng thornton wrote: > [1] The Ord instance for Float and Double is also wrong, since NaN means > there's no total ordering (and the existence of NaN is necessitated by > the existence of Infinity). In addition to the fact that partial > orderings are more common than total orderings, this means we should > have a partial ordering class anyways.
Putting aside whether or not we should have a partial ordering class, you may be technically correct but practically quite wrong. To say that we ought not to be able to use <= on a Double or < on a Float is crazy. To say that I can't detect, with <= and the like, that 2.5 is between 2.0 and 5.0, just because I can't detect its relationship to NaN, strikes me as absurd. Let's not poison the well for 99% of uses because 1% of users have a leaky bucket. -- John _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
