4 ms·
I find that the bane of my existence. It is far better in almost all cases to have it be something vaguely sensible than to have it pop out a virus that infect
by TheLoneWolfling 11y ago
I find that the bane of my existence.
It is far better in almost all cases to have it be something vaguely sensible than to have it pop out a virus that infects everything down the line.
- TazeTSchnitzel 11y ago> I find that the bane of my existence. Then don't use it. You can trap it, you know. > It is far better in almost all cases to have it be something vaguely sensible than to have it pop out a virus that infects everything down the line. It isn't better, because now your program produces incorrect results and you don't know about it.
- TheLoneWolfling 11y agoFor game programming, it is decidedly better to produce subtly incorrect results, at least on a release build, than NaN everywhere.
- yoklov 11y agoIn game programming you want it to be 0 as often as you want it to be 1 (or really, less often). Just write a safeDiv function that takes an argument for what the result should be if the denominator is zero.
- jordigh 11y agoNo. 0/0 cannot be logically given a real value. Make your NaNs signalling if it's a problem. Raise an exception like Python does by default, or warn like modern numpy does. But don't make 0/0 complete and absolute contradictory nonsense like a real value.