Browse thread
[Caml-list] Are you sure the new "=" of 3.08 is good ?
-
Christophe Raffalli
- Jean-Christophe Filliatre
- Sébastien_Furic
- Xavier Leroy
[
Home
]
[ Index:
by date
|
by threads
]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
| Date: | -- (:) |
| From: | Jean-Christophe Filliatre <Jean-Christophe.Filliatre@l...> |
| Subject: | Re: [Caml-list] Are you sure the new "=" of 3.08 is good ? |
Christophe Raffalli writes: > > I spend one complete day to adapt Phox (my theorem prover) to 3.08 > because the new = does not check first physical equality. Indeed, and it was mentioned in Ocaml 3.08 changes: ====================================================================== * Revised handling of NaN floats in polymorphic comparisons. The polymorphic boolean-valued comparisons (=, <, >, etc) now treat NaN as uncomparable, as specified by the IEEE standard. The 3-valued comparison (compare) treats NaN as equal to itself and smaller than all other floats. As a consequence, x == y no longer implies x = y but still implies compare x y = 0. ====================================================================== but Pervasives.compare still checks for physical equality first. It's clear when having a look at byterun/compare.c. -- Jean-Christophe ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners