[gambit-list] Different results in interpreted and compiled code
lucier at math.purdue.edu
Sat Dec 3 13:14:32 EST 2011
On Fri, 2011-12-02 at 19:01 -0800, Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
> I think that expansion is wrong. IIRC, IEEE754 specifies that NaNs are
> unordered. Consequently, I think that both (nan1 == nan2) and (nan1 !=
> nan2) must return false.
That's true in C, and in Gambit
(= nan1 nan2) => #f
because it conforms to IEEE floating-point equality.
But eqv? compares floating-point numbers bitwise in Gambit, and I agree
with that behavior.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Gambit-list