On 10/02/2015 22:46, Joseph Myers wrote: > It may make sense to define LTGT as exactly !UNEQ, and so quiet, but the > choice of definition is a matter of what's convenient for the > implementation (and which choice you make determines which existing code > in GCC should be considered incorrect).
It would be different from e.g. !UNLT and GE differing only in that UNLT is quiet and GE is signaling. So it makes sense to me to keep LTGT as signaling. Paolo
