> Having looked a bit more, I'd say yes. Also, the encode functions
> don't code NaNs the way DEC is saying either.

> I wonder if they have chosen another representation of NaN on a VAX?
> They seem to code a NaN the same way they code an INF, which don't
> even exist as a representation on the VAX.

Neither do NaNs.  VAXen don't have NaNs.  The closest things the VAX
has to IEEE NaNs are reserved operands, which are mostly rather like
IEEE signaling NaNs.  The VAX does not have anything like IEEE quiet
NaNs or infinities.  (I think it doesn't have denormalized numbers,
either, but I'm less sure of that.)

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse@rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B