RFR: 8346914: UB issue in scalbnA

[David Holmes]

On Tue, 10 Jun 2025 07:13:20 GMT, Kim Barrett <kbarrett at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> For the record, I still think it would be better to just delete `scalbnA` (and
>> `copysignA`) and simply use the standard C `scalbn`. But I'm not going to
>> insist on that, given the narrow scope of use and the challenges involved in
>> figuring out whether that could result in any compatibility issue.
>
>> use the standard C `scalbn`.
> 
> Long ago we couldn't use the standard C `scalbn` because (1) Visual Studio
> didn't provide it at all, and (2) we were using C++98/03 / C89 for gcc/clang
> and it was version conditionalized out as being a C99 function.

Lots to process here. I'm away for a few days so will get back to this next week. Thanks @kimbarrett !

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/25656#issuecomment-2958809257