Re: [pure-lang-users] math.pure

[Eddie R. <er...@bm...>]

Should we have the following rules?
_+:nan = nan;
nan+:_ = nan;
nan<:_ = nan;
_<:nan = nan;

My thinking is that if any part of a complex number is nan then the
whole thing is not a number. OTOH, inf+:inf, 0+:inf, inf+:0, etc, you
might want to keep that way for either further processing or to let the
user know the result is a complex number. What does everyone think about
this?

e.r.

On Wed, 2008-08-20 at 13:31 -0500, Eddie Rucker wrote:
> Albert,
> While testing, I looked over some of the logs and here are my
> suggestions:
> 
> Add the rules
> sqrt inf = inf;
> sqrt nan = nan;
> ln inf = inf;
> ln nan = nan;
> 
> Both of these rules also fix
> acosh and atanh of nan and inf
> 
> I think cis is broken for complex numbers. I've got to run give another
> test.
> 
> e.r.
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> _______________________________________________
> pure-lang-users mailing list
> pur...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pure-lang-users