I'd strongly expect this to behave exactly as Float.equals() does. The +0.0/-0.0 problem exists but is nothing new.
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Brian Goetz <[email protected]> wrote: > It's time to play everyone's favorite game show, "What about NaN". > > If we have a record: > > record Foo(float f); > > We would like Object.equals() to be reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. > But if we define equals() in the obvious way (delegating to float==), then > `new Foo(Float.NaN`) would not be equal to itself. > > If we delegate instead to `Float.compare(this.f, that.f)`, the NaN problem > goes away (though comparison becomes modestly more expensive), but now +0 > and -0 are distinguished (== treats them the same.) > > -- Kevin Bourrillion | Java Librarian | Google, Inc. | [email protected]
