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

From: Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk <qrczak>
Date: Thu Nov 23 15:35:02 2006

John Cowan <cowan_at_ccil.org> writes:

>> 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.

And this is why it should be #t. 

-- 
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak_at_knm.org.pl
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/
Received on Thu Nov 23 2006 - 15:33:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Wed Oct 23 2024 - 09:15:00 UTC