[r6rs-discuss] [Formal] Formal Comment: NaN should be considered a number, not a real

[Joe Marshall]

On 6/22/07, Thomas Lord <lord at emf.net> wrote:
>  You're just wrong on that
> point.

I don't want to bore the readers, and this discussion doesn't have
much to do with the original question of whether NaN is a number.
Therefore, I've posted on my blog http://funcall.blogspot.com/  a
message showing how floating-point arithmetic runs into problems if
you attempt to model it with interval arithmetic.  I'd be happy to
continue our discussion in blogspace, on usenet, or on a different
email thread.

-- 
~jrm