30 Oct 90 13:16:15 GMT

Related articles |
---|

[6 earlier articles] |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic eggert@twinsun.com (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic wsb@eng.Sun.COM (1990-10-25) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic sjc@key.COM (1990-10-26) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com (1990-10-15) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic tim@ksr.com (Tim Peters) (1990-10-27) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic bsy+@CS.CMU.EDU (Bennet Yee) (1990-10-28) |

Re: IEEE 754 vs Fortran arithmetic mcohen@amsaa-seer.brl.mil (Marty Cohen) (1990-10-30) |

Newsgroups: | comp.compilers,comp.lang.fortran |

From: | Marty Cohen <mcohen@amsaa-seer.brl.mil> |

Followup-To: | comp.compilers |

Summary: | What is the intention of signed zero? |

Keywords: | Fortran, arithmetic |

Organization: | Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity |

References: | <9010230628.AA22160@admin.ogi.edu> <BURLEY.90Oct24025053@world.std.com> <2408@charon.cwi.nl> <1990Oct28.030338.29498@cs.cmu.edu> |

Distribution: | na |

Date: | 30 Oct 90 13:16:15 GMT |

Does IEEE 754 give a purpose for signed zero?

I.E., is it to result from underflow?

If so, then the -pi, +pi result would be appropriate for atan(-+0,x).

--

Marty Cohen mcohen@brl.mil {uunet|rutgers}!brl!mcohen

Custom House Rm 800, Phila. PA 19106 (215)597-8377

[IEEE 754 doesn't give much of a rationale for anything, it's pretty short.

-John]

--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the
comp.compilers page.

Search the
comp.compilers archives again.