On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 11:55 AM, Gunter Geiger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Adding this functionality would be trivial, if you want you can add > a ticket on track regarding the issue. In the long run the correct solution > would be to try to figure out why there are NaN's ... and fix it there. > > Günter
My best guess is that NaN's come from underflow, under normal circumstances. I wish there would be an easy way to change this behavior via a compiler flag, but I don't think there is. It seems to be a more pervasive problem, and it's unreasonable to expect to add NaN handlers in application code. Thank the IEEE standards for this gem. Chuck _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
