NaNs Just Don't Get No Respect
cal
callumenator at gmail.com
Tue Aug 21 10:22:07 PDT 2012
On Tuesday, 21 August 2012 at 08:15:10 UTC, Don Clugston wrote:
> No, it's the other way around.
> The IEEE 754 standard defines min(x, NaN) == min(NaN, x) == x.
>
> According to the C standard, fmin() should be returning 10, as
> well.
> There is a bug in fmin().
>
> However min() and max() are extremely unusual in this respect.
> Almost everything else involving a NaN returns NaN.
I did not know that. It seems like a not-so-useful rule but I
guess they have their reasons. Note that in my example, fmin()
_did_ return 10 - it was min() that returned NaN...
More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce
mailing list