GNU bug report logs -
#75105
(cl-random -1.0e+INF)
Previous Next
Full log
Message #49 received at 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2025 12:51:45 +0000
> From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
> Cc: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>, mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com, 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, mattiasengdegard <at> gmail.com
>
> "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
>
> >> Cc: 75105 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, mattiasengdegard <at> gmail.com
> >> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
> >> Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 22:17:34 +0000
> >>
> >> 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.
> >
> > IMO, signaling an error is only justified if the call (cl-random 0.0)
> > cannot keep the contract of the function according to its doc string.
> > I don't think the value 0.0 it returns breaks the contract.
>
> "Return a pseudo-random nonnegative number less than LIM, an integer or float.
> Optional second arg STATE is a random-state object."
>
> How is 0.0 a "nonnegative number less than 0.0"? 0.0 isn't less than
> 0.0.
>
> While most users will expect (cl-random 0.0) to return 0.0, which is the
> mathematically sensible thing to do for "a random number between 0.0 and
> 0.0, rounded down", that's not what the docstring currently describes.
If the problem is with the doc string, a fix should be easy.
This bug report was last modified 116 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.