[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: -infinity and REPRESENT
From: |
mhx |
Subject: |
Re: -infinity and REPRESENT |
Date: |
Tue, 05 May 2020 01:03:31 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Roundcube Webmail/1.2.4 |
On 2020-05-04 17:24, Anton Ertl wrote:
I just re-implemented REPRESENT.
One issue is how to deal with -infinity (e.g., the result of -1e 0e
f/).
Previously Gforth 0.7.2+glibc produced "-inf" and f1=0 (positive),
f2=0 (not valid); other libc implementations might lead to different
results.
gforth 0.7.9_20200423 uses an ecvt_r supplied by us and produces
"-inf" and f1=-1 (negative), f2=0 (not valid); the new REPRESENT
currently works in the same way (except that it gives you "-infinity",
space permitting).
In both systems F. and FS. outputs -in.
iForth behaves like gforth 0.7.2.
VFX produces "Inf" and f1=-1, f2=0.
The VFX behaviour looks like the most sensible one to me, but it might
affect code that uses REPRESENT; we can change our own code
accordingly, but what about your code? Do you have code that uses
REPRESENT and that has been designed for a specific behaviour when
getting -infinity?
( Bernd clarified f1 and f2. )
VFX produces "Inf" and f1=-1, f2=0.
I think I will fix iForth (in due time) to give "-INF", f1=-1 f2=-1.
It does not make sense to me to claim f2=0 when the item has a sign and
gives valid output for many operations.
I have used REPRESENT exactly once in a program, in 1997.
However, it is used in a lib that I use almost daily to print scaled
strings ( 1k 1.23u 7.12G etc. ). I have never seen it return
+/-INF there.
-marcel