From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from mother.openwall.net (mother.openwall.net [195.42.179.200]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with SMTP id c9970f5b for ; Sun, 23 Feb 2020 23:20:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 20108 invoked by uid 550); 23 Feb 2020 23:20:55 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 20087 invoked from network); 23 Feb 2020 23:20:54 -0000 X-Authentication-Warning: key0.esi.com.au: damianm owned process doing -bs Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 10:20:41 +1100 (AEDT) From: Damian McGuckin To: musl@lists.openwall.com In-Reply-To: <87mu99ovdk.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> Message-ID: References: <87mu99ovdk.fsf@mid.deneb.enyo.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.02 (LRH 1266 2009-07-14) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Subject: Re: [musl] Min and Max of 2 Floating Point numbers On Sun, 23 Feb 2020, Florian Weimer wrote: > I don't think the new IEEE 754 version specifies the behavior of the > fmax/fmin functions due to the way they implemented this change. Do > you have a publicly accessible reference? Silly me. Yes, fmax and fmin stay functionally the same. > > For ISO C, there is a different proposal here: > > > > It preserves the existing behavior of fmax/fmin, as far as I can tell. Yes it does. I got confused. Apologies - Damian Pacific Engineering Systems International, 277-279 Broadway, Glebe NSW 2037 Ph:+61-2-8571-0847 .. Fx:+61-2-9692-9623 | unsolicited email not wanted here Views & opinions here are mine and not those of any past or present employer