-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7.9k
Feature GH-12143: Extend the maximum precision round can handle by one digit #12222
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
Feature GH-12143: Extend the maximum precision round can handle by one digit #12222
Conversation
@SakiTakamachi Can you rebase this, now that #12220 is merged? |
082e637
to
e330e0b
Compare
@TimWolla |
The digit adjustment is not going well, I am currently fixing it. |
This is a malfunction caused by expanding the accepted digits, so there is no problem with the digit adjustment fix PR itself. |
31304be
to
6e9ade7
Compare
6e9ade7
to
fb41f0f
Compare
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.
One thing that would make it easier to see what changes in these sorts of PRs is to use the rules LLVM has for PRs.
First commit the test with the current behaviour, then do a follow-up commit with the C changes and how it impacts the test.
Thanks, I'll try that |
fb41f0f
to
efdc240
Compare
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.
LGTM, could you add an UPGRADING note when merging?
Please check here for more details.
#12143 (comment)
In the existing implementation, for example, the following code does not perform rounding:
In this example, the maximum value that can be specified for
round()
argument$precision
is15
.This pull request changes
round()
to accept one more fine digit. (16
for the above example)The test will probably not succeed unless it incorporates the changes in #12220.
Also, this PR also includes changes in #12162.
Therefore, you may not be able to accurately check this PR until after these two changes have been merged.