3 ms·
Yea, but conceptually it's a bit smelly to have f(x) get larger and larger the closer x is to 0 and then suddenly have it be 0 once x reaches 0.
by rsp1984 2y ago
Yea, but conceptually it's a bit smelly to have f(x) get larger and larger the closer x is to 0 and then suddenly have it be 0 once x reaches 0.
- renewiltord 2y agoBut once you go behind, it flips suddenly anyway so you could just as well have it be intuitively “halfway between the positive and negative infinities” which is at least fun and could spawn a few “Why is 1/x suddenly go to zero” articles on HN in 2053
- _carbyau_ 2y agoAs others have pointed out "larger and larger" is the same when it is negative too. So I think people are just going: positive infinity + negative infinity = 0. Intuitively nice in a sense but I honestly think '0' is misrepresenting what is going on here. I'm ok with it being ' "+ and/or -" infinity' as a new definition. Programmatically I think it should result in a NULL or VOID or similar. I mean, by definition it has no definition.
- rsp1984 2y agoGood point.