* [Bug libc/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
@ 2013-09-02 4:09 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2013-09-02 9:23 ` pipping at exherbo dot org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: bugdal at aerifal dot cx @ 2013-09-02 4:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |bugdal at aerifal dot cx
--- Comment #1 from Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> ---
Nothing is "obvious" in floating point. In this case I think you are likely
correct that the code is redundant, but in general, in the presence of things
like NANs and negative zeros, "obvious" is often "wrong".
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug libc/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
2013-09-02 4:09 ` [Bug libc/15918] " bugdal at aerifal dot cx
@ 2013-09-02 9:23 ` pipping at exherbo dot org
2013-09-02 13:51 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
` (4 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: pipping at exherbo dot org @ 2013-09-02 9:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Elias Pipping <pipping at exherbo dot org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |INVALID
--- Comment #3 from Elias Pipping <pipping at exherbo dot org> ---
Ouch, I fell into a trap. Sorry for wasting everyone's time.
Could you maybe add a comment to that, in my humble opinion,
very misleading section of the code?
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug libc/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
2013-09-02 4:09 ` [Bug libc/15918] " bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2013-09-02 9:23 ` pipping at exherbo dot org
@ 2013-09-02 13:51 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
2014-02-07 2:59 ` [Bug math/15918] " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: bugdal at aerifal dot cx @ 2013-09-02 13:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED
Resolution|INVALID |---
--- Comment #4 from Rich Felker <bugdal at aerifal dot cx> ---
Andreas, in the case of hypot(NAN,INFINITY), (ha == 0x7f800000) is false, so
that branch won't be taken, and (hb == 0x7f800000) is true, but in that case,
fabs(y) gives the right value no matter what the value of x is. I think the
original bug report is likely correct. It's just not as "obvious" as the
reporter considered it.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug math/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2013-09-02 13:51 ` bugdal at aerifal dot cx
@ 2014-02-07 2:59 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-06-13 12:58 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
` (2 subsequent siblings)
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2014-02-07 2:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Component|libc |math
Severity|normal |enhancement
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug math/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2014-02-07 2:59 ` [Bug math/15918] " jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2014-06-13 12:58 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
2015-09-15 17:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-15 17:25 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: fweimer at redhat dot com @ 2014-06-13 12:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Flags| |security-
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug math/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2014-06-13 12:58 ` fweimer at redhat dot com
@ 2015-09-15 17:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2015-09-15 17:25 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-15 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
--- Comment #5 from cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org <cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was
generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing
the project "GNU C Library master sources".
The branch, master has been updated
via 694aabefd2eb3a0e2c5624d7feb1d7310b2bdd8b (commit)
from 828bf6828b048b1482e95f84ca92e5fe0edcdc0c (commit)
Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have
not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those
revisions in full, below.
- Log -----------------------------------------------------------------
https://sourceware.org/git/gitweb.cgi?p=glibc.git;h=694aabefd2eb3a0e2c5624d7feb1d7310b2bdd8b
commit 694aabefd2eb3a0e2c5624d7feb1d7310b2bdd8b
Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Date: Tue Sep 15 17:24:23 2015 +0000
Simplify hypotf infinity handling (bug 15918).
Bug 15918 points out that the handling of infinities in hypotf can be
simplified: it's enough to return the absolute value of the infinite
argument without first comparing it to the other argument and possibly
returning that other argument's absolute value. This patch makes that
cleanup (which should not change how hypotf behaves on any input).
Tested for x86_64.
[BZ #15918]
* sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32/e_hypotf.c (__ieee754_hypotf): Simplify
handling of cases where one argument is an infinity.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary of changes:
ChangeLog | 4 ++++
NEWS | 12 ++++++------
sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32/e_hypotf.c | 12 ++----------
3 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [Bug math/15918] Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf()
2013-09-01 21:37 [Bug libc/15918] New: Unnecessary check for equality in hypotf() pipping at exherbo dot org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2015-09-15 17:25 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2015-09-15 17:25 ` jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org
6 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2015-09-15 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: glibc-bugs
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15918
Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
Target Milestone|--- |2.23
--- Comment #6 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Fixed for 2.23.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread