nan or -nan?

[bearophile]

Iain Buclaw:

> This behaviour may be due to the libraries rather than the compiler.

In any case there is a bug to be found an fixed.


> But whether the bit that controls signed-ness is on or off, doesn't
> stop the value being NaN.  So I would not give much concern to the
> result.

It's a NaN, but floating point designers have given a sign to NaNs for a (small) purpose. In a numerics-oriented language as D you don't want to ignore that purpose, you want to get right the full semantics of floating point numbers, on 64 bits too. So I suggest to add this problem in Bugzilla.

Bye,
bearophile