Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk skrev:
> 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.
There is more than one bit-pattern for +nan.0.
--
Jens Axel S?gaard
Received on Thu Nov 23 2006 - 15:39:37 UTC