Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] nlog10: do we consider "normalizes log10(x <= 0) to -18" as API?

2017-11-21 Thread Cinaed Simson
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

Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] nlog10: do we consider "normalizes log10(x <= 0) to -18" as API?

2017-11-20 Thread Kevin Reid
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) ==

[Discuss-gnuradio] nlog10: do we consider "normalizes log10(x <= 0) to -18" as API?

2017-11-20 Thread Marcus Müller
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