-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
[stdlib] Support nextafter at compile time
#6787
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
VihaanAgarwal
wants to merge
1
commit into
modular:main
Choose a base branch
from
VihaanAgarwal:fix/nextafter-comptime
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
[stdlib] Support
nextafter at compile time
`nextafter` dispatched only to libc `nextafter`/`nextafterf` through an `external_call`, which the comptime interpreter cannot run, so any call in a comptime context failed to compile. That also blocked `math.ulp`, which relies on `nextafter`. This adds a comptime-interpreter branch that walks to the neighbouring value straight from the IEEE-754 bit pattern and keeps the libc dispatch for runtime. Adjacent representable floats of the same sign have adjacent integer bit patterns, so the step toward `arg1` is a single increment or decrement, with signed zero and NaN handled explicitly. Fixes #6721 Assisted-by: Claude
- Loading branch information
commit 069e47fc412d516f464a475eb4d8e7a890333cda
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These assertions are weaker than they look.
assert_almost_equaldefaults toatol=1e-8, rtol=1e-5, butnextafter(1, 2) = 1.0000000000000002differs from1.0by only ~2.2e-16 — well inside the tolerance. So this would still pass if the function returned exactly1.0(a no-op bug), and likewise the subnormal cases (5e-324is "almost equal" to0). Since the whole point ofnextafteris the 1-ULP step, please useassert_equalhere for exact-bit checking. The test still serves its primary purpose (proving comptime evaluation compiles), so this is a strengthening suggestion rather than a correctness problem — notetest_ulp_at_comptimealready usesassert_equal, which is the pattern to follow. (The pre-existing runtimetest_nextafterhas the same shortcoming).