Tim wrote: > > Err. Are you *sure*? That's an C<until>, not a C<while>, you realize? > > Yes. I had to use all my fingers and toes to keep everything straight, > but I think I did. :-) In the semantics you show (different from IEEE > semantics) "NaN==NaN" is true, so "NaN!=NaN" is false, which is why the > loop continues until a valid number is entered.
Uh huh. As I pointed out, I had missed your assumption of IEEE semantics. Damian
