Hi Jochen, Jochen Küpper wrote:
However, why don't you test what you really describe your comment? This would look like the following (untested):Actually, I had been thinking of something like that first, but then I was afraid that an optimising compiler might transform 't0 != t0+h0' into '0 != h0', making the patch useless for the 'h0 < GSL_DBL_EPSILON*t0' problem.h0 = GSL_MAX_DBL(GSL_DBL_MIN, (t0 != t0+h0) ? h0 : GSL_DBL_EPSILON*t0);
Regards, Frank
