[GitHub] [arrow] bkietz commented on issue #33990: [C++] I know NAN != NAN but shouldn't literal(NAN) == literal(NAN)?

["bkietz (via GitHub)" <gi...@apache.org>]

bkietz commented on issue #33990:
URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/33990#issuecomment-1412842913

   I think that we don't need to support signalling nans. Quiet nans may be produced by floating point expressions with invalid arguments, but signalling nans can only be produced explicitly- which is not functionality I think we'd find valuable. For our purposes, I don't think we need to check for signalling nans.
   
   I do think that `literal(nan) == literal(nan)` should be true- as you say those two expressions are equivalent. I think just to disambiguate the situation the unit test should also assert that `equal(literal(nan), literal(nan))` evaluates to false and clarify why that difference exists with a comment


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: github-unsubscribe@arrow.apache.org

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
users@infra.apache.org