Applied. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > OK, are you saying that there is a signal we are ignoring for > > > overflow/underflow, or that we should just silently overflow/underflow > > > and not throw an error? > > > > Silent underflow is fine with me; it's the norm in most all float > > implementations and won't surprise anyone. For overflow I'm OK with > > either returning infinity or throwing an error --- but if an error, > > it should only be about inf-out-with-non-inf-in, not comparisons to any > > artificial MAX/MIN values. > > OK, I am happy to remove the MIN/MAX comparisons. Those were in the > original code. > > The attached, updated patch creates a single CHECKFLOATVAL() macro that > does the overflow/underflow comparisons and throws an error. This also > reduces the isinf() calls. Should I be concerned we are now duplicating > the error text in all call sites? > > Regression wording modified now that float4/float8 checks are merged. I > haven't update the platform-specific float* expected files yet, but will > on commit. > > -- > Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] > EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com > > + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + > > ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- > TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster -- Bruce Momjian [EMAIL PROTECTED] EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com + If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. + ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 7: You can help support the PostgreSQL project by donating at http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
