[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang
From: |
Felix |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Dec 2010 09:34:50 -0500 (EST) |
From: John Cowan <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: [Chicken-users] llvm-gcc / clang
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 08:35:21 -0500
> Felix scripsit:
>
>> Oh, and clang gave me stupid warnings that where actually wrong
>> (an "x == x" comparison of floats to detect NaN, which is IMHO
>> totally correct, triggers a warning - but I'm sure John can give
>> us the correct interpretation of the standard C semantics).
>
> ISO C doesn't require support for NaNs.
>
If we assume the underlying machine implements IEEE semantics for the
floating-point math, would such a comparison be technically incorrect?
cheers,
felix