This is the mail archive of the
libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the libstdc++ project.
Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
Robert Dewar writes:
> Paolo Carlini wrote:
>
> > Actually, sorry, __builtin_cpow returns (nan, nan) (got
> > sidetracked by a strange issue I'm seeing in the C++ library),
> > even "worse", so to speak...
>
> Well it certainly seems the right result in this case to me. Does
> the standard really require the wrong result here?
F9.4.4 requires pow (x, 0) to return 1 for any x, even NaN.
The controversy about what 0^0 really should be is very old, and
apparently was the subject of a long flame war in the Nineteenth
century...
Andrew.