Bug 3171 – % not implemented correctly for floats

Status
RESOLVED
Resolution
FIXED
Severity
normal
Priority
P2
Component
dmd
Product
D
Version
D2
Platform
Other
OS
Linux
Creation time
2009-07-13T12:01:00Z
Last change time
2015-06-09T05:15:03Z
Keywords
spec
Assigned to
nobody
Creator
andrei

Comments

Comment #0 by andrei — 2009-07-13T12:01:36Z
Comment #1 by bugzilla — 2009-07-13T13:08:41Z
As to why the code generator doesn't use FPREM1 instead of FPREM, there's the following comment: "We don't use fprem1 because for some inexplicable reason we get -5 when we do _modulo(15, 10)" This could be a bug in older CPUs.
Comment #2 by clugdbug — 2009-07-14T01:49:30Z
(In reply to comment #1) > As to why the code generator doesn't use FPREM1 instead of FPREM, there's the > following comment: "We don't use fprem1 because for some inexplicable > reason we get -5 when we do _modulo(15, 10)" > > This could be a bug in older CPUs. It isn't a bug. That's what the IEEE remainder specifies. Note that C's fmod is NOT the same as IEEE remainder. 15/10 = 1.5, so there's a choice of n == 1 or n==2. The standard specifies even n in such cases, so r == a - b*n == 15 - 2*10 == -5. That's kind of... weird, highly non-intuitive, and not terribly useful. I'm pretty sure that that behaviour would be unpopular.
Comment #3 by bugzilla — 2009-07-14T02:27:46Z
Thanks for the explanation. At least I know why that happens, now. What do you suggest, then? Staying with FPREM or going with FPREM1 ?
Comment #4 by clugdbug — 2009-07-14T04:03:19Z
(In reply to comment #3) > Thanks for the explanation. At least I know why that happens, now. What do you > suggest, then? Staying with FPREM or going with FPREM1 ? It's hard to justify including a primitive built-in operator that differs from IEEE. But it may be justifiable when it's the only way to avoid a major break from C and intuition. int x = 15 % 10; int y = cast(int)((cast(float)15) % 10); // Are we really comfortable with these being completely different? You know, all this time I was thinking that the behaviour of % for negative integers was because it needed to be consistent with floating-point modulus... Now it just seems to be wrong. But I think I have the answer. In IEEE, the preferred conversion from float to int uses round-to-nearest. IEEE remainder makes sense in that context. Since in cast(int), D has inherited 'chop' rounding from C, D needs to also inherit C's fmod behaviour. So D should stay with FPREM. But we need to document it properly.
Comment #5 by bugzilla — 2009-07-14T15:15:10Z
We're not breaking with C because C has no % operator for floats. But I agree we should match C99's fmod behavior, which is its current behavior.
Comment #6 by bugzilla — 2009-12-06T00:46:11Z
Fixed dmd 1.053 and 2.037