On 2021-02-11 13:49:48 +0100, Christian Jullien wrote: > No, I think he probably meant (1F-1F) to get 0.0F value?
In the other function, f1 is a variable. I don't see why (1F-1F) would be used: 0.0F would be simpler, and even that, there should be no difference with 0.0, because the zero is converted to long double (and this is why Ayush complained). Still, I don't see the reason of the change. -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
