>>12925536>infinitythat would be an attempt to evaluate the expression, which you shouldn't, just like you don't evaluate the root of negative numbers
you should take the long route instead and have it stick out as a tumor in your equation until you can eventually cancel it out
something like this:
Multiplication:
Division:
Exponentiation:
for
for
In fact the above gives a multiplicative inverse:
So you see, you don't have to worry about infinities and undefined behavior if you just pretend that it's not there until it eventually gets canceled out by a multiplication by 0 and outputs its numerator as a real number.
The problem is here:
Do we get a , or do we get a
But worry not because even the standard algebra does not have a valid order of operations. It pretends that it does, but similarly, it must impose conventions to avoid this
>>12900569 
