Re: [Gretl-devel] NA and nan: next steps

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Gordon Hughes wrote: > Can I raise a dissenting voice? Do you REALLY want to expend the > effort to distinguishing between NA and NaN in every single procedure > and (presumably) every function, etc? It would be even worse if you > added +/-Inf. My reaction is that there are better ways to spend > time in developing the program. I have no desire to spend a lot of time in this area. I suspect there's an intractable problem here, which has to be resolved by fiat. In principle, NA and NaN are different things, which is particularly apparent in the case of evaluating 0*NA versus 0*NaN. The statistical programs that we've had reports on to date on this list resolve the issue by treating NAs as if they were NaNs;