Re: GiST penalty functions [PoC]
От | Greg Stark |
---|---|
Тема | Re: GiST penalty functions [PoC] |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAM-w4HNf34gYFKug2Q2gnbpA8hDvtTbhrNoqMHgYD0za=M0yPg@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: GiST penalty functions [PoC] (Andrew Borodin <borodin@octonica.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: GiST penalty functions [PoC]
Re: GiST penalty functions [PoC] |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:29 AM, Andrew Borodin <borodin@octonica.com> wrote: >>autoconf check for IEEE 754 floats > Autoconf man says folowing: >>it is safe to assume IEEE-754 in most portable code these days > https://www.gnu.org/software/autoconf/manual/autoconf.html#Floating-Point-Portability Personally I wouldn't be very happy about an IEEE754 assumption. I did go to the trouble of testing Postgres on a VAX and we fixed the few instances where it had such dependencies for a net gain. If we intentionally put a dependency in in one place then we'll never be able to determine anywhere else where there are unintentional dependencies. I haven't followed the thread closely but I'm puzzled why you would need to use bit twiddling to set a floating point number. Isn't there a perfectly good way to calculate the value you want using ldexp() and other standard C library functions? -- greg
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: