Thanks for digging deeper into this. > Pesonally, I think the patch should just be reversed... The comment above > the check certainly could be read as 'Linux requires -lieee for correct f.p. > operations', and perhaps that's how it was meant. No, the configure patch is right. Tim will check in a change that treats ERANGE with a return value of 0.0 as underflow (returning 0.0, not raising OverflowError). --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4