On 11/20/2017 07:52 AM, Marcus Müller wrote:
> Hi Folks,
>
> I was about to commit a PR VOLKizing nlog10 [1], but it struck me that
> my processor (imho, correctly) says that log(0) == nan and log(-10) ==
> nan.
>
> Whereas the old nlog10 test case asserts that it's log_10(x<=0) == -18.
It
On Mon, Nov 20, 2017 at 7:52 AM, Marcus Müller wrote:
> I was about to commit a PR VOLKizing nlog10 [1], but it struck me that
> my processor (imho, correctly) says that log(0) == nan and log(-10) ==
> nan.
>
> Whereas the old nlog10 test case asserts that it's log_10(x<=0) ==
Hi Folks,
I was about to commit a PR VOLKizing nlog10 [1], but it struck me that
my processor (imho, correctly) says that log(0) == nan and log(-10) ==
nan.
Whereas the old nlog10 test case asserts that it's log_10(x<=0) == -18.
So, am I allowed to break that assertion for the greater