Please rid me of this goto

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 23 June 2016 at 23:18:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 11:14:08PM +0000, deadalnix via 
> Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On Thursday, 23 June 2016 at 22:53:59 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
>> > This argument only works for discrete sets.  If n and m are 
>> > reals, you'd need a different argument.
>> > 
>> 
>> For reals, you can use limits/continuation as argument.
>
> The problem with that is that you get two different answers:
>
> 	lim  x^y = 0
> 	x->0
>
> but:
>
> 	lim  x^y = 1
> 	y->0
>
> So it's not clear what ought to happen when both x and y 
> approach 0.
>
> The problem is that the 2-variable function f(x,y)=x^y has a 
> discontinuity at (0,0). So approaching it from some directions 
> give 1, approaching it from other directions give 0, and it's 
> not clear why one should choose the value given by one 
> direction above another.
>
> Mathematicians arbitrarily chose its value to be 1 based on 
> arguments like the one Timon gave, but it's an arbitrary 
> choice, not something that the mathematics itself suggest.
>
>
> T

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponentiation#IEEE_floating_point_standard

Most programming language with a power function are implemented 
using the IEEE pow function and therefore evaluate 00 as 1. The 
later C[40] and C++ standards describe this as the normative 
behaviour. The Java standard[41] mandates this behavior. The .NET 
Framework method System.Math.Pow also treats 00 as 1.[42]

I understand that the question is open mathematically, but this 
has been settled already. Please let's focus on something that 
provides value.