But what should the result of _. +. 1 be, if not NaN? Thanks,
-- Raul On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 2:46 PM Henry Rich <henryhr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > USING a NaN is not an error. The result is undefined (sc whatever the > hardware produces). CREATING a NaN is an error. > > _. = 4 > 0 > _. + 4 > _. > _ % _ > |NaN error > | _ %_ > > 1 +. _. is not a Boolean operation. It's calculating the LCM. > > NANTEST calls the OS to see if any NaN-creating operations have been > performed since the most recent NAN0. > > Henry Rich > > > On 5/6/2022 2:35 PM, Raul Miller wrote: > > Hmm... actually, there's a bunch of tests like this already there, > > with comments that NaN errors are treated as zeros in this context. > > > > Which suggests that I was wrong about what the fix should be. > > > > I'll shut up now... > > > > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > https://www.avg.com > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
