[Bug c/95329] fmaxf(inf, nan) does not always work

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95329

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |MOVED
 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED

--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
.

[Bug c/95329] fmaxf(inf, nan) does not always work

[florian at schanda dot org.uk]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95329

--- Comment #3 from Florian Schanda  ---
I have created https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26045

[Bug c/95329] fmaxf(inf, nan) does not always work

[florian at schanda dot org.uk]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95329

--- Comment #2 from Florian Schanda  ---
Cool, thanks for the pointer to their bug tracker. I'll bother them instead ;)

[Bug c/95329] fmaxf(inf, nan) does not always work

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95329

Jakub Jelinek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #1 from Jakub Jelinek  ---
I believe this is a glibc bug rather than gcc.  This is without optimizations
and the library function in libm is called in both cases and giving different
results based on whether it is -inf, nan(0x2cba7e) or -inf, nan(0x40).
glibc has a different bug tracker though, so you need to file it there
(sourceware.org/bugzilla).
If you compile with -O2, you'll get -inf in both cases (in that case no library
call is done and it is folded by gcc).