From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.133.124]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 220873858D39 for ; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 13:50:39 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 220873858D39 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1667915438; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=8ky8HSJ7trXF1i9T5ubOqP0B7EEn+9L6Owh95ZqubNs=; b=ihthdLBxRc1jPO+kORY/0/MxQJ0RMPLD50K7n9w1Hkb/2G2nBwoc/Odqyhr5xCT0Brk3ry 2CeRSqvKGWS6EGtv9wIpOlSzzqmfletFuJapYh0N0afgrOdOkOHiq771/i6WlsAgKU4bzK Bn3JtOK3soDB6ZKN5WBEjIYFbQpyFC4= Received: from mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (mimecast-mx02.redhat.com [66.187.233.88]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-94-EXZs_p63MfSqU6iJDKc7oQ-1; Tue, 08 Nov 2022 08:50:37 -0500 X-MC-Unique: EXZs_p63MfSqU6iJDKc7oQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.8]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx02.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44687811E75 for ; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 13:50:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (unknown [10.39.194.183]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 036CEC15BB5; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 13:50:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tucnak.zalov.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1) with ESMTPS id 2A8DoYI72242983 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 8 Nov 2022 14:50:34 +0100 Received: (from jakub@localhost) by tucnak.zalov.cz (8.17.1/8.17.1/Submit) id 2A8DoXOd2242982; Tue, 8 Nov 2022 14:50:33 +0100 Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 14:50:33 +0100 From: Jakub Jelinek To: Aldy Hernandez Cc: GCC patches , Andrew MacLeod Subject: Re: [PATCH] [PR24021] Implement PLUS_EXPR range-op entry for floats. Message-ID: Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek References: <20221013123649.474497-1-aldyh@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.1 on 10.11.54.8 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Tue, Nov 08, 2022 at 02:47:35PM +0100, Aldy Hernandez wrote: > Well, perhaps we should just nuke update_nan_sign() altogether, and > always keep the sign varying? > > inline bool > propagate_nans (frange &r, const frange &op1, const frange &op2) > { > if (op1.known_isnan () || op2.known_isnan ()) > { > r.set_nan (op1.type ()); > return true; > } > return false; > } > > I'm fine either way. The less code the better :). Yes, but you had 2 callers, so something needs to be done also if in foperator_plus::fold_range. Jakub