Re: Can we use +nan.0?

[David Kastrup]

Han-Wen Nienhuys <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 2:41 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>>> +nan.0 appears fine for that.  But can we rely on it being available on
>>>> supported platforms?  I don't find it in the sources of Lilypond, though
>>>
>>> It sounds a bit fishy especially since alterations are normally
>>> rational numbers.  Why not use a non-number value to signify this?
>>> Maybe #f ?
>>
>> Because alterations are compared using `=' which bombs out on `#f'
>> (which was actually my first attempt).
>
> I'm without context, but maybe the code should look at the comparands
> before comparing?

Sure.  Just means I have to analyze and touch more code.

-- 
David Kastrup