[r6rs-discuss] Re: [Formal] eq?/eqv? misbehave around NaNs

[Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk]

John Cowan <cowan at ccil.org> writes:

>> Is there any scenario where you'd want anything other than:
>> 
>> (eqv? +nan.0 +nan.0) => #t
>
> Eqv? on unboxed floats can be implemented by bitwise comparison
> rather than floating-point equality.

And this is why it should be #t.

-- 
   __("<         Marcin Kowalczyk
   \__/       qrczak at knm.org.pl
    ^^     http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/