[r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] eq?/eqv? misbehave around NaNs

From: John Cowan <cowan>
Date: Thu Nov 23 14:48:03 2006

Per Bothner scripsit:

> Is there any scenario where you'd want anything other than:
>
> (eqv? +nan.0 +nan.0) => #t

Eqv? on unboxed floats can be implemented by bitwise comparison
rather than floating-point equality.

-- 
John Cowan      cowan_at_ccil.org        http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
        Is it not written, "That which is written, is written"?

Received on Thu Nov 23 2006 - 14:47:58 UTC