On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Alexander Belopolsky firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
On Sun, Oct 7, 2012 at 8:42 PM, Chris Angelico email@example.com wrote:
It's much MUCH easier and simpler to defer to somebody else's standard and just say "NaNs behave according to IEEE 754, blame them if you don't like it". There would possibly be value in guaranteeing reflexivity, but it would increase confusion somewhere else.
I agree, but a good thing about standards is that there are plenty to choose from. We can as easily refer to Java as a standard.
Seriously, we can't change our position on this topic now without making a lot of people seriously unhappy. IEEE 754 it is.