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

Previous Next

Full log

Message #40 received at 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
Cc: mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com, 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 mattiasengdegard <at> gmail.com, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca
Subject: Re: bug#75105: (cl-random -1.0e+INF)
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 14:45:24 +0200

> Cc: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>,
>  75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, mattiasengdegard <at> gmail.com
> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 22:24:22 +0000
> From:  Pip Cet via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> "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?

I don't.

Previous Next

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