Re: assertEquals("NaN", x, y, 0.0) where x=y=Double.NaN

--- In junit@xxxx, tumb@xxxx wrote:
> 
> The way things currently work is the way the double class works. 
> This 'patch' would seem to violate the basic contract of double.
> 
> Does assertEquals return true when both objects are null?

>From junit.tests.framework.AssertTest
        public void testAssertEqualsNull() {
                assertEquals(null, null);
        }

> 
> I don't know your procedure for deciding on changes or fixes. Is 
there
> some way to discuss and determine whether or not this fix is proper 
or
> that the current behavior is better?

Submit a test (like the one above) and we can discuss it. Without the 
test it's hard to know precisely what you mean.

Kent