On Fri, 21 Dec 2018, Steve Kargl wrote:
> scalbln(double x, long n)
> {
>
> return (scalbn(x, (n > NMAX) ? NMAX : (n < NMIN) ? NMIN : (int)n));
> }
>
> A search for glibc's libm locates https://tinyurl.com/ybcy8w4t
> which is a bit-twiddling routine. Not sure it's worth the
> effort. Joseph Myers might have an opinion.
Such comparisons are needed in the scalbn / scalbln implementations anyway
to deal with large exponents. I suppose where there's a suitable scalbln
implementation, and you don't know if the arguments are within the range
of int, calling scalbln at least saves code size in the caller and avoids
duplicating those range checks.
--
Joseph S. Myers
jos...@codesourcery.com
