Subject: Re: bug#75105: (cl-random -1.0e+INF)

From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 22:17:34 +0000

Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]> writes:

> 16 feb. 2025 kl. 01.50 skrev Pip Cet <[email-masked]>:
>
>> (cl-random 0.0) returns 0.0, but one could argue it should throw
>
> It definitely should throw, but perhaps it's not worth the incompatibility? Not sure, because existing code that passes 0.0 is likely buggy anyway.
> Or we could say that it's just an ad-hoc extension, by vague analogy of (car nil) = nil.

FWIW, I'd lean towards fixing it, in the hope that very few packages out
there will rely on this wrong behavior.