I am writing Java code that interacts with R, where "NA" values are distinguished from NaN values. NA indicates that a value is "statistically missing", that is it could not collected or is otherwise not available.
class DoubleVector {
public static final double NA = Double.longBitsToDouble(0x7ff0000000001954L);
public static boolean isNA(double input) {
return Double.doubleToRawLongBits(input) == Double.doubleToRawLongBits(NA);
}
/// ...
}
The following unit test demonstrates the relationship between NaN and NA and runs fine on my windows laptop but "isNA(NA) #2" fails sometimes on my ubuntu workstation.
@Test
public void test() {
assertFalse("isNA(NaN) #1", DoubleVector.isNA(DoubleVector.NaN));
assertTrue("isNaN(NaN)", Double.isNaN(DoubleVector.NaN));
assertTrue("isNaN(NA)", Double.isNaN(DoubleVector.NA));
assertTrue("isNA(NA) #2", DoubleVector.isNA(DoubleVector.NA));
assertFalse("isNA(NaN)", DoubleVector.isNA(DoubleVector.NaN));
}
From debugging, it appears that DoubleVector.NA is changed to the canonical NaN value 7ff8000000000000L, but it's hard to tell because printing it to stdout gives different values than the debugger.
Also, the test only fails if it runs after a number of other previous tests; if I run this test alone, it always passes.
Is this a JVM bug? A side effect of optimization?
Tests always pass on:
java version "1.6.0_24"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_24-b07)
Java HotSpot(TM) Client VM (build 19.1-b02, mixed mode, sharing)
Tests sometimes fail on:
java version "1.6.0_24"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_24-b07)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 19.1-b02, mixed mode)
Double isNaN() method in Java with examples The isNaN() method of Java Double class is a built in method in Java returns true if this Double value or the specified double value is Not-a-Number (NaN), or false otherwise.
In C#, the Double. NaN field represents a value that is not a number. It is constant.
To check whether a floating point or double number is NaN (Not a Number) in C++, we can use the isnan() function. The isnan() function is present into the cmath library. This function is introduced in C++ version 11.
A method or operator returns NaN when the result of an operation is undefined. For example, the result of dividing zero by zero is NaN, as the following example shows. (But note that dividing a non-zero number by zero returns either PositiveInfinity or NegativeInfinity, depending on the sign of the divisor.)
You are treading in very dangerous water here, one of the few areas where the Java VM behaviour is not exactly specified.
According to the JVM spec, there is only "a NaN value" in the double
range. No arithmetic operation on doubles could distinguish between two different NaN
values.
The documentation of longBitsToDouble()
has this note:
Note that this method may not be able to return a
double
NaN with exactly same bit pattern as the long argument. IEEE 754 distinguishes between two kinds of NaNs, quiet NaNs and signaling NaNs. The differences between the two kinds of NaN are generally not visible in Java. Arithmetic operations on signaling NaNs turn them into quiet NaNs with a different, but often similar, bit pattern. However, on some processors merely copying a signaling NaN also performs that conversion. In particular, copying a signaling NaN to return it to the calling method may perform this conversion. SolongBitsToDouble
may not be able to return a double with a signaling NaN bit pattern. Consequently, for some long values,doubleToRawLongBits(longBitsToDouble(start))
may not equalstart
. Moreover, which particular bit patterns represent signaling NaNs is platform dependent; although all NaN bit patterns, quiet or signaling, must be in the NaN range identified above.
So assuming that handling a double
value will always keep the specific NaN
value intact is a dangerous thing.
The cleanest solution would be to store your data in long
and convert to double
after checking for your special value. This will impose a quite noticeable performance impact, however.
You might get away by adding the strictfp
flag at the affected places. This doesn't in any way guarantee that it will work, but it will (possibly) change how your JVM handles floating point values and might just be the necessary hint that helps. It will still not be portable, however.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With