Re: bignum branch

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:41:14 -0400
> 
> > NaN (specifically of the IEEE754 variety) is supposed to compare
> > non-equal even when compared to itself.
> 
> There's "compare" and there's "compare".
> I think we always want (eql x x) to return t, so the above behavior
> makes a lot of sense.  The rule that NaN is not equal to itself should
> only be applied when doing a numerical comparison (i.e. (= x x) may
> return nil).

100% agreement.  We are testing equality of two objects, not their
numerical equality.