Re: [Rd] Benefit of treating NA and NaN differently for numerics

2009-12-31 Thread Duncan Murdoch
On 31/12/2009 3:43 PM, Saptarshi Guha wrote: Hello, I notice in main/arithmetic.c, that NA and NaN are encoded differently(since every numeric NA comes from R_NaReal which is defined via ValueOfNA) . What is the benefit of treating these two differently? Why can't NA be a synonym for NaN? I do

Re: [Rd] Benefit of treating NA and NaN differently for numerics

2009-12-31 Thread Ted Harding
On 31-Dec-09 20:43:43, Saptarshi Guha wrote: > Hello, > I notice in main/arithmetic.c, that NA and NaN are encoded > differently(since every numeric NA comes from R_NaReal which is > defined via ValueOfNA) > What is the benefit of treating these two differently? Why can't NA > be a synonym for NaN

[Rd] Benefit of treating NA and NaN differently for numerics

2009-12-31 Thread Saptarshi Guha
Hello, I notice in main/arithmetic.c, that NA and NaN are encoded differently(since every numeric NA comes from R_NaReal which is defined via ValueOfNA) . What is the benefit of treating these two differently? Why can't NA be a synonym for NaN? Thank you Saptarshi (R-2.9) ___