Re: [boost] is_nan

From: John Maddock (john_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-25 08:31:02

Johan Råde wrote:
> So it would make sense to have the functions
>
>    is_finite()
>    is_normal()
>    is_subnormal()
>
>    is_infinity()
>    is_plus_infinity()
>    is_minus_infinity()
>
>    is_nan()

Do we really want to use gratuitously different names from those in C99:

isfinite
isnorm
isinf
isnan

?

> and possibly
>
>    is_quite_nan()
>    is_signalling_nan()
>
> The last two are tricky to implement though.

Actually probably impossible without decoding the bits in the FP number - 
for which you would have to deal with multiple formats in multiple 
endianness's etc.

John.