| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Huong Dangminh <huo-dangminh(at)ys(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com>, Pg Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Akio Iwaasa <aki-iwaasa(at)vt(dot)jp(dot)nec(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow" |
| Date: | 2018-04-29 22:22:42 |
| Message-ID: | 7301.1525040562@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-hackers |
David Rowley <david(dot)rowley(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Wouldn't this machine have returned 1 before this patch though?
No, don't think so, because it doesn't set EDOM for the case.
Basically what we're doing here is making sure that we get results
conforming to current POSIX even on machines that predate that
standard. There are more of them floating around than I'd have
expected, but it still seems like a good change to make. Maybe
there's an argument for not back-patching, though?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Rowley | 2018-04-29 23:24:28 | Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow" |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-04-29 22:10:34 | Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow" |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Michael Paquier | 2018-04-29 22:43:46 | Re: Cold welcoming message when installing anything because of LLVM bitcode stuff |
| Previous Message | David Rowley | 2018-04-29 22:10:34 | Re: power() function in Windows: "value out of range: underflow" |