Le 19/09/2018 à 12:25, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
Le 19/09/2018 à 12:02, Stéphane Mottelet a écrit :
Le 19/09/2018 à 11:46, Samuel Gougeon a écrit :
.../...
At first sight, Octave's result does not look more consistent than
Scilab's one.
But following its own ceiling/flooring rules, yet it is consistent.
What is puzzling is that Scilab implements a *mix* of rules comming
from different software. I am wondering about the true reason:
Scilab:
--> int8(-128)/int8(0)
ans =
-128
This is in Scilab 6. In Scilab 6, int8(-%inf) has been set to the int8
floor, and int8(%inf) to the int8 ceil. It is more consistent than the
5.5 behavior (and is now documented in the 6.0 branch).
Here is the Scilab 6.0.0 changelog in the int8 ... iuint64 help page for
6.0.2:
Would you prefer fixing int32(%inf) in order to keep all answers to 0:
this would avoid any saturating behavior for the infinite values as for
finite ones ; or these new settings?
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users@lists.scilab.org
http://lists.scilab.org/mailman/listinfo/users
