[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>*Subject*: Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0*From*: "John.Cowan" <jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:12:24 -0400*Cc*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <20051022175212.17A9F1B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*References*: <20051021145326.816C11B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051021155906.GC16464@NYCMJCOWA2> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510210910130.18969@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051022020312.GB5632@NYCMJCOWA2> <20051022175212.17A9F1B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>*User-agent*: Mutt/1.4.2.1i

Aubrey Jaffer scripsit: > | (/ 0.0) ==> +nan.0 > | (/ 1.0 0) ==> +inf.0 > | (/ -1 0.0) ==> -inf.0 > | (/ +inf.0) ==> 0.0 > > If 0.0 is the multiplicative inverse of +inf.0, then +inf.0 must be > multiplicative inverse of 0.0. But (/ 0.0) ==> +nan.0. Which line is > correct? The first line is transparently a typo for (/ 0.0 0.0) ==> +nan.0. -- Yes, chili in the eye is bad, but so is your John Cowan ear. However, I would suggest you wash your jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx hands thoroughly before going to the toilet. http://www.reutershealth.com --gadicath http://www.ccil.org/~cowan

**Follow-Ups**:**Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**References**:**arithmetic issues***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*John.Cowan

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*bear

**Re: arithmetic issues***From:*John.Cowan

**multiplicative inverse of 0.0***From:*Aubrey Jaffer

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Exactness** - Next by Date:
**Re: +nan.0 problems** - Previous by thread:
**Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0** - Next by thread:
**Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0** - Index(es):