https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=105414
--- Comment #6 from HaoChen Gui <guihaoc at gcc dot gnu.org> --- (In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4) > I think you want > > (if (!tree_expr_maybe_signaling_nan_p (@0)) > ... > > instead. Thanks so much for comments. Do we have a way to return a NaN directly in match.pd when both arguments are sNaN?