Re: Missing/invalid data points

[<br...@ph...>]

Petr Mikulik wrote:
> It seems that Inf is handled, so why not NaN?

Because NaN is worse than Inf.  Infinity doesn't have all the properties 
of a number, but still some of them.  In particular +Inf is larger than 
any other number, -Inf is smaller than any other.

So Inf is generally just out-of-range.   A NaN value, OTOH, is 
completely undefined.  It's not even equal to itself!

> #x y type
>   0.1  10  i
>   0.2  20  i
>   0.3  0.3  u
>   0.4  40  i

Arguably, there's a bug in this result.  The Inf could have
have been stored and marked as "out of range" ('o' instead of 'u').