[cfp-interest 3711] Re: compoundn(0,n)

[Jim Thomas]

> On Nov 7, 2025, at 2:12 PM, Damian McGuckin <damianm at esi.com.au> wrote:
> 
>>> 
>>> This case is specified explicitly in ISO/IEC 60559, and Annex F does include similar cases, e.g.  exp(+/-0) is 1.
>>> 
>>> Are there other such cases?
>>> 
>>> Are there exact cases not mentioned in ISO/IEC 60559 because the exactness is implied by correct rounding that should be added to F.10?
>> 
>> pow(x,1) is exactly x
>> scalbn(x,0) is exactly x     [and scalbln and ldexp]
> 
> Should I add these to the Annex F changes or are these normative?
> 

I think these should be in a separate proposal (if CFP approves of pursuing it). They are technical changes.

- Jim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.oakapple.net/pipermail/cfp-interest/attachments/20251107/6b7cbb1e/attachment.htm>