Re: (long) sNaNs not what they could be...
> Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2010 20:17:17 -0400
> Subject: Re: (long) sNaNs not what they could be...
> From: Lee Winter <lee.j.i.winter@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: Dan Zuras Intervals <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "N.M. Maclaren" <nmm1@xxxxxxxxx>, stds-1788@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 6:01 PM, Dan Zuras Intervals
> <intervals08@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> > I will outline it.
> >
> > . . .
> >
>
> What you have described is why SNaNs are not particularly useful as a
> memory initializer. But AFAICT none of the above reasons indicate
> that SNaNs are inappropriate or ineffective for constructing FP
> variables. I intend to continue offering them as a non-default
> option. Did I miss something?
>
> Lee Winter
> Nashua, New Hampshire
> United States of America
Nope. Knock yourself out. - Dan