This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: fmax/fmin sNaN compatibility question


On Mon, 9 Dec 2019, Ulrich Weigand wrote:

> So just to clarify: there was a sample implementation in C11, and now there
> is a (different) sample implementation in TS 18661-1 / C2x, but the expected
> behavior in FP_SNANS_ALWAYS_SIGNAL mode is neither of those, but rather the
> behavior described by maxNum from IEEE 754-2008.  Right?

Yes.

> Do you know why the sample implementation was even updated then?
> If FP_SNANS_ALWAYS_SIGNAL is false, shouldn't the C11 method then
> still be OK?

The canonicalize call is needed in general to avoid propagating 
noncanonical DFP encodings, though not relevant for binary FP.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]