[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         AssignedTo|aj at suse dot de           |unassigned at sourceware
                   |                            |dot org

--- Comment #6 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-02-28 17:00:42 UTC ---
Confirmed still present on x86: (1), (2), (3), (4a), (4b), (5), (6), (7).

On x86_64: (1), (2) pass, (3) has the right result but no OVERFLOW exception,
(4a) has the right result but no UNDERFLOW exception, (4b) has the right result
but no DIVBYZERO exception, (5), (6), (7) pass.

There are two tests numbered (4) which I have marked (4a) and (4b).  I do not
reproduce with current sources the report of (4b) pow(-0, -1e100) passing.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

--- Comment #7 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-21 12:20:27 UTC ---
(4b), (5), (6), (7) fixed by:

commit 2460d3aa21f04cdf28497683bd3e29183189f779
Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Date:   Wed Mar 21 12:14:57 2012 +0000

    Fix pow of zero and infinity to large powers.

(1), (2), (3), (4a) remain to be fixed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED

--- Comment #8 from Joseph Myers <jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-03-28 15:03:59 UTC ---
Remaining cases fixed by:

commit d6270972f79fe89a96fa7a3909991dad2e317033
Author: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>
Date:   Wed Mar 28 14:57:58 2012 +0000

    Fix pow of negative numbers to integer exponents (bugs 369, 2678, 3866).

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

Jackie Rosen <jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com

--- Comment #9 from Jackie Rosen <jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com> ---
*** Bug 260998 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Seen from the domain http://volichat.com
Page where seen: http://volichat.com/adult-chat-rooms
Marked for reference. Resolved as fixed @bugzilla.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[schwab at sourceware dot org]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

Andreas Schwab <schwab at sourceware dot org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|jackie.rosen at hushmail dot com   |

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[ovilewade9 at gmail dot com]

https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

ovile009988 <ovilewade9 at gmail dot com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ovilewade9 at gmail dot com

--- Comment #10 from ovile009988 <ovilewade9 at gmail dot com> ---
Very nice to getting the site here https://free-robuxnoverification.com and
look free robux generator no human verification all update.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[vincent+libc at vinc17 dot org]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vincent+libc at vinc17 dot
                   |                            |org


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com  2008-08-08 05:48 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> (In reply to comment #2)
> > 4) pow(-0, -1e100)
> > 
> > this problem seems to be absent on glibc 2.8.  There, pow(-0, -1e100) does 
the
> > right thing, returning -Inf and giving EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO.
> But the right thing to do would return +Inf and giving EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO, as
> -1e100 is < 0 and not an odd integer (specified in. F.9.4.4, second dash.)

Oops.  Yes, of course you are right.  And glibc 2.8 is doing the right thing, 
I just wrote the wrong thing. pow(-0, -1e100) gives +Inf with 
EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[kreckel at ginac dot de]

------- Additional Comments From kreckel at ginac dot de  2008-08-05 22:04 -------
(In reply to comment #2)
> 4) pow(-0, -1e100)
> 
> this problem seems to be absent on glibc 2.8.  There, pow(-0, -1e100) does the
> right thing, returning -Inf and giving EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO.

But the right thing to do would return +Inf and giving EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO, as
-1e100 is < 0 and not an odd integer (specified in. F.9.4.4, second dash.)

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com  2008-08-05 14:21 -------
Regarding:
5) pow(-inf, -1e100):
6) pow(-inf, 1e100):

The problem persists in glibc 2.8, and again the cut-off y value that
demonstrates this behavior is |y| greater than about  9.223373e18.


-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com  2008-08-05 14:19 -------
Regarding:
4) pow(-0, -1e100)

this problem seems to be absent on glibc 2.8.  There, pow(-0, -1e100) does the
right thing, returning -Inf and giving EDOM/FE_DIVBYZERO.

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com]

------- Additional Comments From mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com  2008-08-05 14:05 -------
Created an attachment (id=2892)
 --> (http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=2892&action=view)
test program

Just to add a little detail here regarding these four points:

1) pow(-1, 1e100):
2) pow(-1, -1e100):
3) pow(-3.141592, 1e100):
4) pow(-3.141592, -1e100):

If x is less than -0, then (on x86, glibc 2.8) pow() fails with EDOM/FE_INVALID
for any y whose absolute value is greater than about 9.223373e18. 
(EDOM/FE_INVALID == pole error, which is the error that occurs if x == 0, and y
is negative)

-- 


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Bug math/3866] pow(double, double) does not fulfil several of C99's requirements

[mtk dot manpages at gmail dot com]

-- 
           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mtk dot manpages at gmail
                   |                            |dot com


http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3866

------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.