Re: Slaying the HYPOTamus

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Paul Matthews <plm(at)netspace(dot)net(dot)au>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Slaying the HYPOTamus
Date: 2009-08-25 00:14:31
Message-ID: 9413.1251159271@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Paul Matthews <plm(at)netspace(dot)net(dot)au> writes:
> Just trying to implement correct C99 behaviour here.

Around here we tend to read the Single Unix Spec before C99, and SUS
saith something different:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/xsh/hypot.html

It would be serious folly for us to suppose that every platform's
version of hypot() behaves exactly the same for these corner cases,
anyway. If you're proposing to write code that would depend on that,
we need to call it something else and not pretend that it's just a
fill-in for platforms that lack hypot() entirely.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2009-08-25 00:34:07 Re: Bug in date arithmetic
Previous Message Tom Lane 2009-08-25 00:02:31 Re: 8.5 release timetable, again