Re: Support for non-unique process labels?

Nicolas Martyanoff <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.erlang.general
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Peer Stritzinger <[email protected]> writes:

>> On 10. May 2021, at 11:37, Nicolas Martyanoff <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> There are proposals to change that. However it is not true that Erlang do
>>> not support NaNs, it "support" them, but only sNaNs while not supporting
>>> qNaNs like other languages.
>> No it does not. There is no representation for a NaN or infinite value,
>> and there is no way to control the result of IEEE.754 invalid operations
>> (since Erlang chose to only signal errors, which is incredibly
>> unpractical for various numerical computations).
>
> Thats what the “s” in “sNaNs” mean its signalling a error.  Whats
> missing is qNaNs .. “q” for quiet but people who miss them are working
> on that.
There is an interesting PR with a start of an idea, but it still does
not have any official response for nearly 3 months. And I'm not aware of
any other initiative.

> I’m not aware that Erlang does mishandle -0.0 and +0.0 what do you
> mean?
-0.0 evaluate to 0.0.

-- 
Nicolas Martyanoff
http://snowsyn.net
[email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.