Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 142 posts

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#131

Post by Dylan16807 »

terminalbraid wrote: post #63
vermilingua wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think there is much systems code that needs an exponent of -1, maybe none that needs exponents at all (aside from 2^n, which has opcodes, not C functions)

The bug is for an exponent of 2. The base is -1.

They mean power of -1.

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#136

Post by hbn »

volemo wrote: post #129
hbn wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft is long past the point of realizing they don't need to make their product good to keep users. Everyone who uses Windows is stuck using it because of software lock-in, or it's what's on the laptop their job provides, or because they can't afford a Mac. Outside of niche communities, there aren't a lot of "Windows fans" out there these days. They'll gladly harvest your data whether you like them or not!

> because they can't afford a Mac Ha, as if the situation with macOS is much better? The OS space is a (lopsided) duopoly, both Microsoft and Apple know it and have pulled down their sleeves long ago.

Yes, I have years of experience with both and macOS is way less of a user-hostile experience. People buy Apple products because they like them.

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#137

Post by nottorp »

hbn wrote: post #136
volemo wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because they can't afford a Mac Ha, as if the situation with macOS is much better? The OS space is a (lopsided) duopoly, both Microsoft and Apple know it and have pulled down their sleeves long ago.

Yes, I have years of experience with both and macOS is way less of a user-hostile experience. People buy Apple products because they like them.

Because they like them better than Windows actually.

They're both crap, Apple is less crap.

This post typed on a macbook pro.

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#138

Post by monkeyelite »

pas wrote: post #124
monkeyelite wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it has more to do with the people than the tools.

that's what the comment means we as people went from picking Ada to ReactJS of course we also went from having no Rust and no TypeScript and only a few hundred thousand semi-academic people having some knowledge of programming to hundreds of millions of people doing some tutorial/bootcamp/cert/degree, or even built something, or actively learns, or right now works as a professional programmer. (un)fortunately Ada was…

> as people went from picking Ada to ReactJS

That didn't happen in the 80s either. They picked C over Ada.

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#139

Post by snickerbockers »

Y_Y wrote: post #50
snickerbockers wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The bug is in an underlying library they didn't test that they just assumed that since they call a library function the library function must be the root-cause. This is classic bug-punting.

If you can't hunt it, punt it!

you're hired!

Re: Math.Pow(-1, 2) == -1 in Windows 11 Insider build

#140

Post by rmilk »

coldpie wrote: post #93
mdemare wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a library has a flaw that big, it is a bug to use that library.

You are going to have a very short, frustrating career in software if that's your position. Bugs happen, report them, get them fixed, chill out, and don't be a dick.

I’m going to give a HARD disagree with this type of hand waving for a bug in pow(). First, how was a change allowed in such a fundamental function without significant justification and validation. It’s exponentiation. That’s like saying you want to fix multiplication. Sure, but it better get higher scrutiny that a higher-level function. Second, where is regression testing. It’s a trivial function to write tests for, which means MS never created real test plans for basic UCRT functions. This is where the outrage should placed.
Post reply on HN