Tom Lane wrote:
> Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> > Wikipedia says that exponentiation of zero to a negative power implies
> > division by zero, so shouldn't we throw a "division by zero" error?
> 
> I think it should be a specific message like "zero raised to a negative
> power is undefined".  It's not like it's going to take us any extra code
> to know that we are faced with that case.
> 
> BTW, I realized that SQL:2003 spells it all out for us in explicit
> detail:

...

> b) If VB is 0 (zero) and VE is negative, then an exception condition is
> raised: data exception  invalid argument for power function.

Well, this indicates we shouldn't return "zero raised to a negative
power is undefined", but rather the power error we are giving now, or
are you saying we should return the "power" error code but an error
message mentioning zero?

> c) If VB is 0 (zero) and VE is 0 (zero), then the result is 1 (one). 

I have updated the C comments to mention the spec also requires we
return 1 in this case.

C comment updated attached and applied.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>        http://momjian.us
  EnterpriseDB                             http://enterprisedb.com

  + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

• Re: pgsql: Have numeric 0 ^ 4.3 return 1, rather than an error, and have 0 ^ at 2008-05-09 14:37:07 from Tom Lane

Responses

• Re: pgsql: Have numeric 0 ^ 4.3 return 1, rather than an error, and have 0 ^ at 2008-05-09 15:57:42 from Tom Lane

pgsql-committers by date

Next:	From: Peter Eisentraut	Date: 2008-05-09 15:36:31
	Subject: pgsql: Add "%option noinput" to the scanners to avoid compiler warnings.
Previous:	From: Bruce Momjian	Date: 2008-05-09 15:36:06
	Subject: pgsql: Update C comments to mention SQL:2003 handling of power return