On Mon, 6 Feb 2023 08:46:54 GMT, Tagir F. Valeev <tval...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> That should probably include a comment then. > > @ExE-Boss I think that immediately following `isNaN` checks give enough hint > that we want NaN to be here. Ah I see, a comment explaining the intention would be helpful here, then ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/12428
