[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bignum branch

From: Clément Pit-Claudel
Subject: Re: bignum branch
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 09:09:49 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1

On 2018-07-18 07:57, Paul Eggert wrote:
> For example, (eql 0.0e+NaN -0.0e+NaN) now returns t
> because the two NaNs have different signs; formerly it returned nil.

Should this be the other way around ?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]