On 2014-07-10 01:57, Ben Finney wrote:
"Anders J. Munch" <2...@jmunch.dk> writes:
Joel Goldstick wrote:
> I've been following along here, and it seems you haven't received
> the answer you want or need.
So far I received exactly the answer I was expecting. 0 examples of
NaN!=NaN being beneficial.
Predictability and ease of diagnosis are the principles at work
<URL:http://stackoverflow.com/a/1573715/70157>. You have already
received examples of those.
If those don't convince you of its usefulness, that's unfortunate, but
at this point you are demonstrating a standard which is both
unreasonably high (even the rationale of the committee doesn't convince
you) and unreasonably low (you ask not for explanations but personal
anecdotes).
Good luck to you in your quest.
I can think of one place where equality of NaNs would be useful:
sorting.
However, in that use-case, you would also want it to be orderable,
perhaps greater than any other non-NaN float.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
