bigfloat

[Frits van Bommel]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:41:35 -0400, Frits van Bommel 
> <fvbommel at remwovexcapss.nl> wrote:
> 
>> dsimcha wrote:
>>> == Quote from Jarrett Billingsley (jarrett.billingsley at gmail.com)'s 
>>> article
>>>> On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 3:39 PM, Walter Bright
>>>> <newshound1 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>>> Paul D. Anderson wrote:
>>>>>> b) the features and functions that should be included.
>>>>> I'd say NaNs and unordered comparisons. In other words, it should 
>>>>> support
>>>>> the same semantics as float, double and real do.
>>>> opUnorderedCmp?
>>>  What's wrong with just returning some sentinel from opCmp?  For 
>>> example, define
>>> int.max as the sentinel for when comparing with nans involved, etc.  
>>> For opEquals,
>>> we don't have a problem, just return false.
>>
>> IIRC having an opCmp returning floats works, so you could return 
>> float.nan.
>> (I've never used this, but I think it was mentioned in these groups)
> 
> 
> It works if you want to just do x < y.  However, try sorting an array of 
> structs that return float for opCmp, and you'll get an error.  This is 
> because the compiler has special meaning for opCmp of a certain 
> signature, which goes into the TypeInfo.  I submitted a bug for those 
> functions to be documented: 
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2482

Yet another reason to get rid of built-in .sort; a templated function would have 
no problem with this :).