3 ms·

So, let me get this straight. Is this saying that, on the one hand, > [A]s far as I can tell x86 and ARM never generate sNaNs, ... but the CPU can still gene

So, let me get this straight. Is this saying that, on the one hand, > [A]s far as I can tell x86 and ARM never generate sNaNs, ... but the CPU can still generate the other kind? > There we go, that’s a quiet NaN. It's proving a little hard for me to follow along. My understanding is that this is happening from a floating point number being converted to an integer, back to floating point, then back to an integer again? I think I'm wrong.

perl4ever 8y ago
"but the CPU can still generate the other kind?" I think the point is you can't get the silent bit turned off except by the extreme method of casting arbitrary non-float data. If you deal with floats in the normal way, they are never signalling. "My understanding is that this is happening from a floating point number being converted to an integer, back to floating point, then back to an integer again?" The example seems to be integer -> float. The integer is just a bit pattern that happens to mean "signalling NaN" and the author is trying to convert it to a float and unhappy with the "silent" bit/flag changing. I come back to my other comment, that the bit is not really part of the value, so I feel like the concept of equality for the test is what should be fixed.