On 2006-06-14, Nick Maclaren <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Gary Herron <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>|>
>|> The IEEE standard specifies (plus or minus) infinity as the result of
>|> division by zero. This makes sense since such is the limit of division
>|> by a quantity that goes to zero. The IEEE standard then goes on to
>|> define reasonable results for arithmetic between infinities and real
>|> values. The production of, and arithmetic on, infinities is a choice
>|> that any application may want allow or not.
>
> The mistake you have made (and it IS a mistake) is in assuming
> that the denominator approaches zero from the direction
> indicated by its sign.
I assume the "you" in that sentence refers to the IEEE FP
standards group. I just try to follow the standard, but I have
found that the behavior required by the IEEE standard is
generally what works best for my applications.
> There are many reasons why it is likely to not be, but let's give only
> two:
>
> It may be a true zero - i.e. a count that is genuinely zero, or
> the result of subtracting a number from itself.
I do real-world engineering stuff with measured physical
quatities. There generally is no such thing as "true zero".
> I fully agree that infinity arithmetic is fairly well-defined for
> most operations, but it most definitely is not in this case. It should
> be reserved for when the operations have overflowed.
All I can say is that 1/0 => Inf sure seems to work well for
me.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! World War Three can
at be averted by adherence
visi.com to a strictly enforced
dress code!
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
