Did not realize that 0 * Infinity is NaN. Anyone know why that wouldn't be expected to be 0?
-
-
-
-
Replying to @sgrif
oh no, I checked the spec and it also allowed negative zero so I don't know what to believe now.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dissimile
That one actually has reasoning behind it at least. If 0 were unsigned, 1 / (1 / x) == x wouldn't hold for all values of x
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sgrif
except I now learn that 0 == -0 but 1/0 != 1/-0. I guess the moral of the story is that is floating point math isn't math.
5 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @dissimile
(And as a software maintainer, the world is better when you can find that choices were explicit and made with intention)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @sgrif
yeah, all of these choices are "that seems reasonable given the constraints" rather than "that is bad and you should feel bad."
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Yeah, I think the only choice that could fall into the latter is looking at all of this and deciding you don't need integers
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.