Andrew Josey <ajosey@xxxxxx> wrote, on 22 Aug 2008:
>
> Minutes of the 21 August 2008 Teleconference Austin-439 Page 1 of 1
> Submitted by Andrew Josey, The Open Group. August 22 , 2008
> XSHbug3 ERN 6 tgamma Accept as marked
>
> Andrew circulated 11679 from Fred
>
> Send down the interps track.
> The standard does not speak to this issue, and as such
> no conformance distinction can be made between alternative
> implementations based on this. This is being referred to the
> sponsor.
>
> Target for TC1
>
> Changes proposed for a future revision:
>
> Add the following to tgamma (this text comes from exp()):
>
> RETURN VALUE
>
> If the correct value would cause underflow, and is not representable,
> a range error may occur, [MX] and either 0.0 (if supported), or [/MX]
> an implementation-defined value shall be returned.
>
> [MX] If the correct value would cause underflow, and is representable,
> a range error may occur and the correct value shall be returned. [/MX]
>
>
> ERRORS
>
> These functions may fail if:
>
> Range Error The result underflows.
>
> If the integer expression (math_errhandling & MATH_ERRNO) is non-zero,
> then errno shall be set to [ERANGE]. If the integer expression
> (math_errhandling & MATH_ERREXCEPT) is non-zero, then the underflow
> floating-point exception shall be raised.
Since C99 does not specify underflow for tgamma(), all of this new
text should be CX shaded.
--
Geoff Clare <g.clare@xxxxxx>
The Open Group, Thames Tower, Station Road, Reading, RG1 1LX, England
|