Ranier Vilela writes:
> Yes, but the comment it does not clarify that the return of the variable
> "const_one" is intentional, instead of "const_zero".
I'm not sure which part of "NaN ^ 0 = 1" doesn't clarify for you that
the intended result is 1.
Even without the comment, if you'd bothered to
Hi,
Yes, but the comment it does not clarify that the return of the variable
"const_one" is intentional, instead of "const_zero".
Anybody with reads the source, can think which is a copy and paste mistake.
regards
Ranier Vilela
Em dom., 19 de jan. de 2020 às 21:22, Tom Lane escreveu:
> Ranier
Ranier Vilela writes:
> Possible copy and past error, found in numeric.c.
> I believe I believe that the author's intention was to return const_zero.
Did you read the comment just above there?
regards, tom lane
Hi,
Possible copy and past error, found in numeric.c.
I believe I believe that the author's intention was to return const_zero.
regards,
Ranier Vilela
numeric.patch
Description: Binary data
