This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
Cc: Robert Dewar <dewar at adacore dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org,libstdc++ <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 16:45:12 +0100
Subject: Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
References: <422C63ED.8020200@suse.de> <422C6C28.6070309@suse.de> <422C6FF8.6020102@adacore.com> <16940.30123.460980.69359@cuddles.cambridge.redhat.com>

Andrew Haley wrote:

F9.4.4 requires pow (x, 0) to return 1 for any x, even NaN.

Indeed. My point, basically, is that consistency appear to require the
very same behavior for *complex* zero^zero.

Paolo.

References:
- __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
  - From: Paolo Carlini
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
  - From: Robert Dewar
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0))
  - From: Andrew Haley

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]