English version
Accueil     À propos     Téléchargement     Ressources     Contactez-nous    

Ce site est rarement mis à jour. Pour les informations les plus récentes, rendez-vous sur le nouveau site OCaml à l'adresse ocaml.org.

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Weird behavior with nan's and min/max
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: 2003-10-14 (20:52)
From: Yaron Minsky <yminsky@c...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Weird behavior with nan's and min/max
I've gotten a bunch of replies on this, some pointing out that the proper
result could be achieved with various methods for detecting nan's
explicitly.  This kind of misses my point, which is that this leads to
some pretty serious violations of the principle of least surprise.

The first is that adding a type annotation to a function can change its
semantics:  the specialized min function I came up with works
substantively differently depending on whether it's known at compile-time
that it operates only on floats.

The second weirdness is the breaking of (==) => (=), since "nan == nan"
evaluates to true and "nan = nan" evaluates to false.

These are pretty weird and unpleasant surprises, and now that I've been
bitten by them I'm eager to avoid them in the future.  Hence my desire for
a polymorphic equality function that doesn't change it's behavior when
applied to floats.


To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners