------- Comment #9 from iano at apple dot com 2006-08-22 00:49 -------
Subject: Re: __builtin_nan() and __builtin_unordered() inconsistent
On Aug 21, 2006, at 5:42 PM, pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu wrote:
>
>
> ------- Comment #8 from pinskia at physics dot uc dot edu
> 2006-08-22 00:42 -------
> Subject: Re: __builtin_nan() and __builtin_unordered() inconsistent
>
>> Which part of:
>>
>> __builtin_isunordered(nan,nan) = 1
>> __builtin_isnan(nan) = 0
>>
>> is consistent?
>
> Did you read what the options do because it seems like you did not
> and you keep
> on agruing that
> it is inconsistent except for the fact this is way these options
> are done as it
> just says "allows for
> optimizations" and not always assume finite math and ignore NaNs
> all the time.
Yes, I did. All one sentence of it:
-ffinite-math-only
Allow optimizations for floating-point arithmetic that assume
that
arguments and results are not NaNs or +-Infs.
Do you know what an unordered compare is?
Ian
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28796
