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

This page is part of the web mail archives of SRFI 77 from before July 7th, 2015. The new archives for SRFI 77 contain all messages, not just those from before July 7th, 2015.

*To*: jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Subject*: Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0*From*: Aubrey Jaffer <agj@xxxxxxxxxxxx>*Date*: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:35:40 -0400 (EDT)*Cc*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*Delivered-to*: srfi-77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*In-reply-to*: <20051023161224.GE7728@NYCMJCOWA2> (jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)*References*: <20051021145326.816C11B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051021155906.GC16464@NYCMJCOWA2> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0510210910130.18969@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051022020312.GB5632@NYCMJCOWA2> <20051022175212.17A9F1B77BB@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20051023161224.GE7728@NYCMJCOWA2>

| Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2005 12:12:24 -0400 | From: "John.Cowan" <jcowan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> | | 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. I don't think so. The next three lines are: (/ 0 0.0) ==> unspecified (/ 0.0 0) ==> +nan.0 (/ 0.0 0.0) ==> +nan.0

**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

**Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0***From:*John.Cowan

- Prev by Date:
**Re: +nan.0 problems** - Next by Date:
**Is exact 0 "stronger" than inexact 0.0?** - Previous by thread:
**Re: multiplicative inverse of 0.0** - Next by thread:
**multiplicative inverse of 0.0** - Index(es):