28 Mar
2010
28 Mar
'10
10:14 p.m.
On 28 March 2010 18:12, Chad Nelson <chad.thecomfychair@gmail.com> wrote:
Sorry, but no. n1692 specifies that it's supposed to throw an std::overflow exception when it can't get the memory it needs to represent a number.
Doesn't this statement that "the standard says it must throw" conflict with your justification for having NaN as being "for when exceptions are blocked"?