This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Bug in complex::norm
- To: Joern Rennecke <amylaar at redhat dot com>
- Subject: Re: Bug in complex::norm
- From: Branko Čibej <brane at xbc dot nu>
- Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2001 23:39:14 +0200
- CC: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at codesourcery dot com>, Maurizio Loreti <loreti at pd dot infn dot it>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, nbecker at fred dot net
- References: <200108221828.f7MISxc23607@phal.cambridge.redhat.com>
Joern Rennecke wrote:
>>I don't recall if I changed norm's implementation, and if so I don't
>>recall why. But we should have a less inefficient implementation.
>Is norm required to be the euclidian norm? I would think that it is
>faster to compute the maximum norm.
26.2.7p5 says that norm returns the squared magnitude of its argument,
so it's required to be the euclidean norm.
Brane Čibej <email@example.com> http://www.xbc.nu/brane/