https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207
--- Comment #10 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- n Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 03:38:10PM +0000, sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207 > > --- Comment #9 from Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask dot apl.washington.edu> --- > On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 10:53:40AM +0000, guez at lmd dot ens.fr wrote: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82207 > > > > --- Comment #8 from Lionel GUEZ <guez at lmd dot ens.fr> --- > > It does not seem completely true that gfortran makes no distinction between > > qNaN and sNaN. > > See comment #2. > To be clear. I'm not being dismissive, here. The bug report is still open because there is some agreement that how gfortran handles qNaN and sNaN needs to be revisited. The problem is that there are only a few individuals who actively contribute to gfortran development. There are currently 931 open bug reports. They may not have the time (or perhaps the interest in this issue) given the 930 other problems. If the problem is a significant roadblock for you, then getting involved with gfortran development would be most welcomed. You can ask questions on the fortran@ and gcc@ mailing list. Also, given your email address, you may be able to directly (as in person) discuss the IEEE 754 implementation with Francois-Xavier Coudert <fxcoud...@gcc.gnu.org> (although FX's contributions have diminished over time due to Real Life, ie., wife, kids, job, etc.).
