From maintainers-request at octave dot org Wed Apr 12 15:07:51 2006
Subject: Re: NaN
From: "Shai Ayal" <shaiay at gmail dot com>
To: "John W. Eaton" <jwe at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu>
Cc: "octave maintainers mailing list" <maintainers at octave dot org>
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 23:06:16 +0300

On 4/12/06, John W. Eaton <jwe at bevo dot che dot wisc dot edu> wrote:
> On 11-Apr-2006, Shai Ayal wrote:
>
> | In trying to implement NaN's for octplot I took some of the code from
> | octave, which includes a run-time calculation of NaN
> |
> | Is there any any reason that it was implemented this way and not by
> | using the nan function (C99 standard) or strtod("NaN",0), which is
> | supposed to be ANSI C?
> |
> | (these two ways were pointed to me by Bruno Rogerri)
>
> Octave has been around longer than c99.

So this means there is nothing wrong with me using it now as far as you know

> I didn't know about strtod ("NaN", 0), but I'm not sure I would have
> used this method anyway, even if I had.

Can you explain why?

> jwe
>