GNU bug report logs - #75105
(cl-random -1.0e+INF)

Previous Next

Full log

Message #34 received at 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>,
 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, mattiasengdegard <at> gmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#75105: (cl-random -1.0e+INF)
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 15:14:24 -0800

Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com> writes:

> "Stefan Kangas" <stefankangas <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> 16 feb. 2025 kl. 01.50 skrev Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>:
>>>
>>>> (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.
>
> Just to clarify, you think (cl-random 0.0) returning 0.0 is wrong
> behavior?

Yes, sorry for not being more clear.

> If so, everyone agrees we should make it throw, if for
> different reasons (I think the 0.0 return value is mathematically
> correct but not important enough for us to deviate from the standard, so
> I changed my mind after reading that).

Right.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.