Re: (long) sNaNs not what they could be...
> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 18:54:44 -0400
> To: stds-1788 <stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> From: Michel Hack <hack@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: (long) sNaNs not what they could be...
> . . .
> Btw, some machines (HP's PA-RISC if I remember correctly)
> do use a 1-bit to denote SNaN, and all-ones is an SNaN, but
> this complicates the Quieting operation, which may have to
> insert another 1-bit to prevent decaying to Infinity.
Oh, Michel, I know this all too well.
I was HP's "man on the 754 committee"
I was on the team that designed that
first generation of floating-point
chips at HP in 1981.
I made that choice.
The wrong one as it happens.