================ @@ -2922,7 +2922,7 @@ static bool handleFloatFloatBinOp(EvalInfo &Info, const BinaryOperator *E, // If during the evaluation of an expression, the result is not // mathematically defined [...], the behavior is undefined. // FIXME: C++ rules require us to not conform to IEEE 754 here. - if (LHS.isNaN()) { + if (!Info.getLangOpts().CPlusPlus23 && LHS.isNaN()) { ---------------- hubert-reinterpretcast wrote:
> Do we want to do the same for C++23? If not what's exactly an "unspecified" > value? It means that `INT_MAX` and `INT_MIN` is fine (based on the wording). The committee discussion had already decided that the constexpr evaluation need not match the target's runtime in terms of implementation-defined behavior with respect to: - what cases are errors, and - how non-error cases of NaNs and infinities, etc. are handled. Instead, C's Annex F was to specify the behaviour; however, that C's Annex F did not fully specify the result (as in the case in question) was not discussed. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/88978 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits