From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm
Received: (qmail 16639 invoked from network); 3 Feb 2002 10:14:42 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO is.elta.co.il) (199.203.121.2)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 3 Feb 2002 10:14:42 -0000
Received: (from eliz@localhost)
	by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) id MAA00578;
	Sun, 3 Feb 2002 12:13:54 +0200 (IST)
Date: Sun, 03 Feb 2002 02:14:00 -0000
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
Message-Id: <200202031013.MAA00578@is.elta.co.il>
To: jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com
CC: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
In-reply-to: <20020203044322.A6F3D5E9DE@zwingli.cygnus.com> (message from Jim
	Blandy on Sat, 2 Feb 2002 23:43:22 -0500 (EST))
Subject: Re: RFA: Fix sparc-specific MI tests
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@is.elta.co.il>
References:  <20020203044322.A6F3D5E9DE@zwingli.cygnus.com>
X-SW-Source: 2002-02/txt/msg00034.txt.bz2

> From: Jim Blandy <jimb@zwingli.cygnus.com>
> Date: Sat,  2 Feb 2002 23:43:22 -0500 (EST)
> 
> 	(sparc_register_tests): Expand floating-point number regexp to
> 	recognize NaN values, too.

If we are going to support NaN's, should we support Inf's as well?