Received: from localhost (maia-2.hub.org [200.46.204.187])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA13B9F93A2
	for <pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:44:01 -0400 (AST)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.187]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 67884-01 for
	<pgsql-patches-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:43:47 -0400 (AST)
X-Greylist: delayed 01:16:36.597376 by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com (out4.smtp.messagingengine.com
	[66.111.4.28]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE8DA9F938C
	for <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 17:43:50 -0400 (AST)
Received: from out1.internal (unknown [10.202.2.149])
	by out1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D26D59F14;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:42:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from heartbeat1.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.160])
	by out1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:42:45 -0500
X-Sasl-enc: VvC+eqRNRR6Mv4hAN/sgBxWqNAH9b7ZquAmq/RRTB8PB 1167255764
Received: from [10.10.0.130] (adsl-68-75-163-199.dsl.emhril.ameritech.net
	[68.75.163.199])
	by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C29651BF2F;
	Wed, 27 Dec 2006 16:42:44 -0500 (EST)
Message-ID: <4592E915.4050901@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2006 15:43:49 -0600
From: Roman Kononov <kononov195-pgsql@yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061117)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
CC: PostgreSQL-patches <pgsql-patches@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: [BUGS] BUG #2846: inconsistent and confusing handling of
	underflows,
References: <200612272123.kBRLNdg05533@momjian.us>
In-Reply-To: <200612272123.kBRLNdg05533@momjian.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.527 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, BAYES_50,
	FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD
X-Spam-Level: ***
X-Archive-Number: 200612/161
X-Sequence-Number: 21837

On 12/27/2006 03:23 PM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> Are you sure?  As I remember, computation automatically upgrades to
> 'double'.  See this program and output:

This is platform- and compiler- dependent:

~>uname -a
Linux rklinux 2.6.15-27-amd64-generic #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Dec 8 17:50:54 UTC 2006 x86_64 GNU/Linux
~>gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 4.3.0 20061213 (experimental)
Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

~>cat test.c
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>

int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
    float a = 1e30, b = 1e30;
    double c;

    c = a * b;

    printf("%e\n", c);
    return 0;
}
~>gcc test.c
~>./a.out
inf
~>gcc -march=i386 -m32 test.c
~>./a.out
1.000000e+60

Roman