Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> OK, are you saying that there is a signal we are ignoring for
> overflow/underflow, or that we should just silently overflow/underflow
> and not throw an error?
Silent underflow is fine with me; it's the norm in most all float
implementations and won't surprise anyone. For overflow I'm OK with
either returning infinity or throwing an error --- but if an error,
it should only be about inf-out-with-non-inf-in, not comparisons to any
artificial MAX/MIN values.
Anyone else have an opinion about this?
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
