Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Don wrote:
Inclusion of the NCEG operators was a bit of tokenism, making a _very_
strong statement that D took numerical programmers seriously. But I
think D's at the point where it can make that statement without
relying on tokenism.
So is it ok to yank them?
Andrei
Yes if and only if we get agreement from Tango that tango2.math can use
std.math.
There's one other minor issue:
isNaN() isn't supposed to trigger on signalling NaNs, but !<>= should
trigger them. I'm not sure that _anyone_ actually cares about this
difference (you can use isSignallingNaN() in the rare case where you
don't want to trigger it), but it would be a difference from IEEE if we
signalled when isNaN() is called, which is what would happen if we
recreated the !<>= operators by merging isNaN with <,>, =.
