Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Change from parametric T signature to Int32 in _ldexp_exp #29401

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 29, 2018

Conversation

pkofod
Copy link
Contributor

@pkofod pkofod commented Sep 27, 2018

__ldexp_exp(f) requires the second argument to be an Int32, so we might as well hard-code that here. It also seems that the old specification is actually not valid, or might have unexpected results, so we should just go with Int32, see #29400 .

__ldexp_exp(f) requires the second argument to be an Int32, so we might as well hard-code that here. It also seems that the old specification is actually not valid, or might have unexpected results, so we should just go with Int32, see JuliaLang#29400 .
@pkofod
Copy link
Contributor Author

pkofod commented Sep 29, 2018

CI seems happy :)

@KristofferC KristofferC added bugfix This change fixes an existing bug backport pending 1.0 labels Sep 29, 2018
@KristofferC KristofferC merged commit 75f798f into JuliaLang:master Sep 29, 2018
@pkofod pkofod deleted the patch-5 branch September 29, 2018 18:40
KristofferC pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2018
__ldexp_exp(f) requires the second argument to be an Int32, so we might as well hard-code that here. It also seems that the old specification is actually not valid, or might have unexpected results, so we should just go with Int32, see #29400 .

(cherry picked from commit 75f798f)
KristofferC pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 11, 2019
__ldexp_exp(f) requires the second argument to be an Int32, so we might as well hard-code that here. It also seems that the old specification is actually not valid, or might have unexpected results, so we should just go with Int32, see #29400 .

(cherry picked from commit 75f798f)
KristofferC pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 20, 2020
__ldexp_exp(f) requires the second argument to be an Int32, so we might as well hard-code that here. It also seems that the old specification is actually not valid, or might have unexpected results, so we should just go with Int32, see #29400 .

(cherry picked from commit 75f798f)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bugfix This change fixes an existing bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants