================ @@ -46,9 +46,7 @@ _CLC_DEF _CLC_OVERLOAD __CLC_GENTYPE __clc_hypot(__CLC_GENTYPE x, __CLC_GENTYPE retval = __clc_sqrt(__clc_mad(fx, fx, fy * fy)) * fx_exp; retval = (ux > PINFBITPATT_SP32 || uy == 0) ? __CLC_AS_GENTYPE(ux) : retval; - retval = (ux == PINFBITPATT_SP32 || uy == PINFBITPATT_SP32) - ? __CLC_AS_GENTYPE((__CLC_UINTN)PINFBITPATT_SP32) - : retval; + retval = __clc_isinf(x) || __clc_isinf(y) ? __CLC_GENTYPE_INF : retval; ---------------- frasercrmck wrote:
Right yeah, I see. Thank you for the explanation. I'm still pondering the naming of the frexp and ldexp helpers you propose. It's not fully-fledged frexp or ldexp as far as I can tell. If it is, then our implementations of frexp and ldexp are far too complicated. Are we talking about a 'native' frexp and ldexp? A 'fast' one? That's just going on existing OpenCL terminology, which may or may not confuse things. Should they handle NaNs, Infs, subnormals? https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/129738 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
