[Coco] Different Computer Give Different Answers to TAN(X)

James Jones jejones3141 at gmail.com
Sat Mar 28 19:25:36 EDT 2020

I'd say overflow for tan(90) makes sense. Even if you have IEEE-754
floating point and thus have infinities, one can argue that instead, you
should get NaN (not a number), because the limit of tan(x) as x increases
to 90 degrees is +infinity, while the limit of tanIx) as x decreases to 90
degrees is -Infinity, so no number makes sense for tan(90).

More information about the Coco mailing list