Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mC6Q0-0005XR-BW for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 20:26:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mC6Pz-00036y-B8 for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 20:26:11 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mC6Pz-00036q-3m for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 20:26:11 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mC6Pw-0007wT-45 for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 20:26:10 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 176KQ6MA2557152; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 16:26:06 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Dean Rasheed cc: Yugo NAGATA , PostgreSQL Hackers , Dave Page Subject: Re: Numeric x^y for negative x In-reply-to: References: <20210720181509.51a037ed0a8cb0f6d3ffda3a@sraoss.co.jp> <20210722141136.573c11dfc06f4dd46b661bca@sraoss.co.jp> <2394813.1628179479@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2449471.1628218684@sss.pgh.pa.us> <2492411.1628266518@sss.pgh.pa.us> Comments: In-reply-to Dean Rasheed message dated "Fri, 06 Aug 2021 21:23:39 +0100" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <2557150.1628281566.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 16:26:06 -0400 Message-ID: <2557151.1628281566@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Archived-At: Precedence: bulk Dean Rasheed writes: > On Fri, 6 Aug 2021 at 17:15, Tom Lane wrote: >> Looks plausible by eyeball (I've not tested). > So, I have back-branch patches for this ready to go. The question is, > is it better to push now, or wait until after next week's releases? I'd push now, given we have a failing buildfarm member. Admittedly, there may be nobody else using that compiler out in the real world, but we don't know that. regards, tom lane