2009/7/8 Reinout Heeck <[email protected]>: > > On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:53 PM, Andres Valloud wrote: > >> Well, but on the other hand, what happens when you do things like >> 1.0 + >> NaN or NaN + 1.0? It should work... > > It will break further down the line though: > > (1.0 + NaN) < (1.0 + NaN) > > should that return NaB (not a Boolean)? > > > Shouldn't obtaining NaN from arithmetic be modeled as a resumable > exception, so the calling code can decide what kind of object to > return as the value? (Instead of only one choice being hardwired in > the system). > >
IMO, that's the main interest in NaN class: make the Exception behaviour programmable from within the image. Nicolas > > R > - > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
