[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: lib/45372: A bug in pow(3)
The following reply was made to PR lib/45372; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Jukka Ruohonen <jruohonen%iki.fi@localhost>
Subject: Re: lib/45372: A bug in pow(3)
Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2011 12:57:44 +0300
On Sat, Sep 17, 2011 at 09:30:06AM +0000, Thomas Klausner wrote:
> So you're saying that -1^(+infinity) is 1?
Yes, in libm(3).
> Which standard defines that?
> e_pow.c explicitly mentions the case:
> * 9. +-1 ** +-INF is NAN
> and I tend to agree.
It is wrong. There is little room for interpretation in the standards.
Note also that Linux and other operating systems have this right.
Main Index |
Thread Index |