gcd
and lcm
should support a wider range of input valuesSection: 13.1.2 [fund.ts.v2::numeric.ops.gcd], 13.1.3 [fund.ts.v2::numeric.ops.lcm] Status: TS Submitter: Marshall Clow Opened: 2016-11-09 Last modified: 2020-09-06
Priority: Not Prioritized
View all other issues in [fund.ts.v2::numeric.ops.gcd].
View all issues with TS status.
Discussion:
Addresses fund.ts.v2: JP 010, JP 011
By the current definition,gcd((int64_t)1234, (int32_t)-2147483648)
is
ill-formed (because 2147483648
is not representable as a value of int32_t
.)
We want to change this case to be well-formed. As long as both |m|
and |n|
are representable as values of the common type, absolute values can
be calculate d
without causing unspecified behavior, by converting m
and n
to the common type before taking the negation.
Suggested resolution:
|m|
shall be representable as a value of typeM
and|n|
shall be representable as a value of typeN
|m|
and|n|
shall be representable as a value ofcommon_type_t<M, N>
.
[Issues Telecon 16-Dec-2016]
Resolved by N4616
Proposed resolution:
This wording is relative to N4600.
Edit 13.1.2 [fund.ts.v2::numeric.ops.gcd] as indicated:
template<class M, class N> constexpr common_type_t<M, N> gcd(M m, N n);-2- Requires:
|m|
shall be representable as a value of typeM
and|n|
shall be representable as a value of typeN
|m|
and|n|
shall be representable as a value ofcommon_type_t<M, N>
. [Note: These requirements ensure, for example, thatgcd(m, m) = |m|
is representable as a value of typeM
. — end note]
Edit 13.1.3 [fund.ts.v2::numeric.ops.lcm] as indicated:
template<class M, class N> constexpr common_type_t<M, N> lcm(M m, N n);-2- Requires:
|m|
shall be representable as a value of typeM
and|n|
shall be representable as a value of typeN
|m|
and|n|
shall be representable as a value ofcommon_type_t<M, N>
. The least common multiple of|m|
and|n|
shall be representable as a value of typecommon_type_t<M, N>
.