X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:to:cc:subject:from
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=
	default; b=xSq2zArmlounvJ3KMmjAYf0ZW2Hc5iHgQwH25xRDOatgktwXQ1KPK
	U/myyeBguVpzRph2ZhD9LJMxYMiWzCynMAjl0vilngxHoUR/jbO8xK05vNOJqmKW
	SgUIns5EMzE7AIUxXznnX+gPhsXl/yba0bDvaJi5EyFSMCjvnYxnc0=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:message-id:to:cc:subject:from
	:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=default;
	bh=1I6yhXS3i97ENJkGLpECog/jwMU=; b=vAlrgGVt54wo3FD/zaRNDaeZKsst
	HPrhafvMMgSbx4/+4AExn04xVDkqry8JR9xfut/me3xXWdRbW6UcQO8RsthZBbxB
	qTYdorCsq58Opk+UZWAr70MsTzk4HVRtqE9vc3+r7aWFfYhmTJFOe4hWTrkwH+7A
	a/RPMex2vWnlN/E=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*x:version, H*UA:version, H*Ad:D*jp
X-HELO:	msc13.plala.or.jp
Date:	Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:15:50 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id:	<20180814.001550.1040828527127506667.trueroad@trueroad.jp>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Cc:	trueroad AT trueroad DOT jp
Subject:	`std::stod ("nan")` returns negative NaN
From:	Masamichi Hosoda <trueroad AT trueroad DOT jp>
Mime-Version:	1.0
X-VirusScan:	Outbound; mvir-ac13; Tue, 14 Aug 2018 00:15:55 +0900

Hi

I've found a curious behavior about `std::stod ("nan")` on Cygwin.
Only on Cygwin, `std::stod ("nan")` returns negative NaN.
On Linux etc., `std::stod ("nan")` returns positive NaN.

Here is a reproduction code.

```
// g++ -std=c++11 foobar.cc

#include <iostream>
#include <limits>
#include <string>

int main ()
{
  std::cout << "stod (\"nan\") = "
            << std::stod ("nan")
            << std::endl;
  std::cout << "stod (\"-nan\") = "
            << std::stod ("-nan")
            << std::endl;

  std::cout << "quiet_NaN () = "
            << std::numeric_limits<double>::quiet_NaN ()
            << std::endl;
}
```

The result on Cygwin 2.10.0 64 bit (g++ 7.3.0):
```
stod ("nan") = -nan
stod ("-nan") = nan
quiet_NaN () = nan
```

The result on MinGW-w64 64 bit (g++ 4.9.2):
```
stod ("nan") = nan
stod ("-nan") = nan
quiet_NaN () = nan
```

The result on Ubuntu 16.04 LTS 64 bit (g++ 5.4.0):
```
stod ("nan") = nan
stod ("-nan") = nan
quiet_NaN () = nan
```

The result on FreeBSD 10.1 64 bit (clang++ 3.4.1):
```
stod ("nan") = nan
stod ("-nan") = nan
quiet_NaN () = nan
```

Is it correct that returning negative NaN on Cygwin?

Thanks.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -