[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Making 'eq' == 'eql' in bignum branch

From: Clément Pit-Claudel
Subject: Re: Making 'eq' == 'eql' in bignum branch
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 14:56:47 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1

On 2018-08-28 23:22, Elias Mårtenson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 at 02:19, Clément Pit-Claudel <address@hidden 
> <mailto:address@hidden>> wrote:
>     FWIW, I'm not a fan of using either (min) or (max) to represent minus 
> infinity; it looks a bit odd.  Many other languages have an infinity constant 
> already, so that pattern is well established; making (max) an alias for 
> either of the infinities is prone to introducing confusion.
> For anyone curious, the way to do it in APL is ⌈/⍬ and ⌊/⍬, which literally 
> means take the max and min values of an empty list, so it's not completely 
> unheard of.

Let me amend what I wrote above.  I'm not excited about (max) becoming the 
common spelling for negative infinity, but I'm fine with changing max to accept 
zero arguments and return -infinity in that case (and, indeed, that's the only 
value that makes sense to me).

I'd simply prefer to have a more explicit spelling for both infinities, and if 
1.0e+INF if too hard to remember, a new read syntax or a new defconst would 
have my preference over (max) and (min).


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]