On Friday 05 November 2004 14:11, you wrote: > It's worse: Since according to IEEE +0 is not equal to -0, atan2 is not a > function!
Sorry, I meant to write: Since according to IEEE +0 *is* to be regarded as equal to -0, atan2 is not a function. (Because it gives different values for argument combinations -0, +0.) Ben _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
