Maybe you could make your own 64-bit bitstype, which restricted values to integer values in the range that will fit in a Float64 (around -2^53 to 2^53). Then you could be sure you didn't lose any information (give an InexactError if a value doesn't fit), and still allow for a NaN value, and fairly efficient computation.
On Friday, July 24, 2015 at 2:04:33 PM UTC-4, Júlio Hoffimann wrote: > > Thank you all, that is what I thought, I will stick with plain Float64 for > now. > > -Júlio > > 2015-07-24 10:59 GMT-07:00 Erik Schnetter <[email protected] <javascript:> > >: > >> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Júlio Hoffimann <[email protected] >> <javascript:>> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> Is there any definition of NaN for Integer types? Let's say I want to >>> create a matrix with some unspecified entries, that is entries marked >>> special. I am using NaN for Float64 but would like to make it work with >>> other types too. Suggestions? >>> >> >> There is no pre-defined integer nan equivalent. >> >> Option 1 (fast but unsafe): Pick a special int value that is rarely used, >> e.g. typemin(Int). >> Option 2 (works with all types, including Float64, and is safer): Use a >> nullable type. This might complicate your code and may slightly increase >> your memory usage. >> >> -erik >> >> -- >> Erik Schnetter <[email protected] <javascript:>> >> http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/personal/eschnetter/ >> > >
