Re: factorial of negative numbers - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: factorial of negative numbers
Date
Msg-id e2738962-037a-4403-8071-735f8341de8a@2ndquadrant.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: factorial of negative numbers  (Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo.santamaria@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: factorial of negative numbers  (Juan José Santamaría Flecha <juanjo.santamaria@gmail.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 2020-06-18 09:43, Juan José Santamaría Flecha wrote:
> 
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 9:13 AM Peter Eisentraut 
> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com 
> <mailto:peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>> wrote:
> 
>     On 2020-06-16 14:17, Dean Rasheed wrote:
>      > I think you're probably right though. Raising an out-of-range error
>      > seems like the best option.
> 
>     committed as proposed then
> 
> 
> The gamma function from math.h returns a NaN for negative integer 
> values, the postgres factorial function returns a numeric, which allows 
> NaN. Raising an out-of-range error seems only reasonable for an integer 
> output.

But this is not the gamma function.  The gamma function is undefined at 
zero, but factorial(0) returns 1.  So this is similar but not the same.

Moreover, functions such as log() also error out on unsupportable input 
values, so it's consistent with the spec.

-- 
Peter Eisentraut              http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Fujii Masao
Date:
Subject: Re: POC and rebased patch for CSN based snapshots
Next
From: Juan José Santamaría Flecha
Date:
Subject: Re: factorial of negative numbers