On 2005-03-10 15:54:03 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > The C standard is not the holy bible and certainly does not define > everything. We're talking about compiler construction, here.
This isn't just compiler construction. __builtin_cpow is equivalent to the C99 cpow (as said in gcc/doc/extend.texi), and the end-user is concerned by the C99 cpow. > | I disagree. One can mathematically define 0^0 as 1. One often does > | this. > > what you do is to set a local convention regardless of all > mathematical absurdities you run into. That is very different from > having 0^0 mathematically defined. I would have expected that the math > courses you took at ENS Lyon mentioned that. This is not a local convention. You probably have never seen a polynomial expression written like this: P(x) = \sum a_i x^i... -- Vincent Lefèvre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.org/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.org/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / SPACES project at LORIA
