[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Issue ERROR-CHECKING-IN-NUMBERS-CHAPTER
- To: Kim A. Barrett <IIM%ECLA@ECLC.USC.EDU>
- Subject: Re: Issue ERROR-CHECKING-IN-NUMBERS-CHAPTER
- From: masinter.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: 15 Mar 89 07:02 PST
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, cl-cleanup@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: Kim A. Barrett <IIM%ECLA@ECLC.USC.EDU>'s message of Sun, 12 Mar 89 16:01:13 PST
I think NaNs should cause ARITHMETIC-ERROR, since "what's one man's NaN is
another man's number."
To put it another way, TYPE-ERROR is generally a sign of a program error
and the cases in which it is signalled should usually not vary from
implementation to implementation; however, which cases signal
ARITHMETIC-ERROR can vary depending on the implementation's floating number
Should we define specific conditions to correspond to the IEEE conditions
as subtypes of ARITHMETIC-ERROR?
I think that it is important to bring this issue to the X3J13 meeting, even
if it isn't quite ready for vote.
If there's a new draft soon, we can have it available for discussion there,
and maybe get an "endorse in principle".