>>>>> William Dunlap <wdun...@tibco.com>
>>>>> on Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:06:08 -0700 writes:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: r-help-boun...@r-project.org
>> [mailto:r-help-boun...@r-project.org] On Behalf Of Giovanni Petris
>> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 3:00 PM
>> To: milton.ru...@gmail.com
>> Cc: r-help@r-project.org; daniel.gerl...@geodecapital.com
>> Subject: Re: [R] Why is 0 not an integer?
>>
>>
>> I ran an instant experiment...
>>
>> > typeof(0)
>> [1] "double"
>> > typeof(-0)
>> [1] "double"
>> > identical(0, -0)
>> [1] TRUE
>>
>> Best,
>> Giovanni
> But 0.0 and -0.0 have different reciprocals
>> 1.0/0.0
> [1] Inf
>> 1.0/-0.0
> [1] -Inf
Yes, indeed!
Finally something interesting in this boring thread !
A few of us have agreed in the past that indeed, it would be
preferable if identical() *did* reflect this difference.
I'm going to discuss this -- it's about technical details and
future changes to R in the appropriate mailing list :
---> R-devel
Martin Maechler, ETH Zurich
> Bill Dunlap
> TIBCO Software Inc - Spotfire Division
> wdunlap tibco.com
>>
>> > By the way:
>> >
>> > Are there difference between -0 and 0?
>>
______________________________________________
R-help@r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
