From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200304221855.h3MIt5Uq000907@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: Yet another try on nan in strto{f,d,ld}
In-Reply-To: <1225-Tue22Apr2003111232+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> "from Eli Zaretskii
 at Apr 22, 2003 11:12:33 am"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:55:05 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> > Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2003 20:04:40 +0200 (CEST)
> Finally, instead of saying
> 
>     the return value is a NaN with the mantissa bits set to
>     @code{@var{hex-number}&0xfffffffffffff}
> 
> isn't it better to say
> 
>     the return value is a NaN with the mantissa bits set to
>     the lower 52 bits of @var{hex-number}

Similarly, should "Use at most 8
hexadecimal digits in @var{hex-number} or the internal conversion will
overflow, which results in a mantissa of 0x7fffff.  If
@code{@var{hex-number}&0x7fffff} is 0 (which won't work as a
representation of a NaN) @code{NAN} will be returned." be 

"Use at most 8
hexadecimal digits in @var{hex-number} or the internal conversion will
overflow, which results in a mantissa of all ones.  If the bit pattern
given is 0 (which won't work as a representation of a NaN) @code{NAN}
will be returned."?

(Against this is that some fussiness(sp?) might be inserted. The bits
patterns can't be misunderstood even though they might be hard on
beginners.)

If yes, should, in the previous paragraph, "of all ones" be as is, or 
"of all 1s" or "with all bits set"?


Right,

						MartinS