[r6rs-discuss] response to formal comment 8 [equality predicates and NaN]

[Per Bothner]

 > For example, a system with delayed boxing of
 > inexact real numbers may box the two arguments to eqv?
 > separately, the boxing process may involve a change of
 > precision, and the two separate changes of precision may
 > result in two different payloads.

I really can't visualize how this could be.  If two unboxed
flonums have the same precision, representation, and bit-pattern,
how could any sane implementation box them into two values
with different precision?

However, as long as it is make clear that (eq? +nan.0 +nan.0)
is allowed to evaluate to #t, I don't really care.  I will just
think of it as a quality-of-implementation issue.
-- 
	--Per Bothner
per at bothner.com   http://per.bothner.com/