Stephen L Moshier wrote:
>
> pow(x,y) returns 0 when x is very close to -1.0 and y is very large.
> The following test program prints
>
> pow(1.0000000000000002e+00 4.5035996273704970e+15) = 2.7182818284590455e+00
> pow(-1.0000000000000002e+00 4.5035996273704970e+15) =0.0000000000000000e+00
> pow(9.9999999999999978e-01 4.5035996273704970e+15) = 3.6787944117144222e-01
> pow(-9.9999999999999978e-01 4.5035996273704970e+15) = 0.0000000000000000e+00
>
> which is incorrect for the negative arguments raised to an odd integer
> power.
>
> -----
> double pow (double, double);
>
> int
> main ()
> {
>   double x, y, z;
>
>   x = 1.0 + pow (2.0, -52.0);
>   y = 1.0 + pow (2.0, 52.0);
>   z = pow (x, y);
>   printf ("pow(%.16e %.16e) = %.16e\n", x, y, z);
>   x = -x;
>   z = pow (x, y);
>   printf ("pow(%.16e %.16e) = %.16e\n", x, y, z);
>   x = 1.0 - pow (2.0, -52.0);
>   z = pow (x, y);
>   printf ("pow(%.16e %.16e) = %.16e\n", x, y, z);
>   x = -x;
>   z = pow (x, y);
>   printf ("pow(%.16e %.16e) = %.16e\n", x, y, z);
> }
> -----
>
> Here is a patch for newlib/libm/math/epow.c:

Patch checked in and duplicated for ef_pow.c.  Thanks.

-- Jeff J.

--HG--
extra : convert_revision : svn%3Ac70aab31-4412-0410-b14c-859654838e24/trunk%403207