J3/04-298r1
Date: 5-May-2004
To: J3
From: JOR/interp/Stan Whitlock
Subj: F95 interpretation #000004
NUMBER: 000004
TITLE: Value returned by MAXVAL/MINVAL
KEYWORDS: MAXVAL, MINVAL
DEFECT TYPE: Interpretation
STATUS: J3 consideration in progress
QUESTION:
The Result Value section of the MAXVAL intrinsic function description
uses the phrasing:
or has the value of the negative number of the largest magnitude
supported by the processor for numbers of the type and kind type
parameter of ARRAY if ARRAY has size zero
This phrasing has generated at least the two following views on the
return value:
* If the machine supports the IEEE standard then the implementation
should return -inf.
* For portability, the implementation should return -HUGE(ARRAY).
These views lead to the following questions:
1. Is the intent of the standard to describe the result in terms of
machine values rather than model values?
2. If the answer to 1 is "yes", how are programmers expected to use
this intrinsic function portably?
ANSWER:
1. Yes. Processors may support values that are not present in the
model of 13.7.1. IEEE -inf is an example of such a number and this
may be returned on a machine that supports the IEEE standard. If the
negative number of the largest magnitude in the model had been
intended, the model would have been mentioned as, for example, in the
definition of HUGE (13.14.39).
2. A simple example of its use is to test whether a set of numbers
SET1 has a value greater than any value in the set SET2. Consider
the expression MAXVAL (SET1) > MAXVAL (SET2). If SET1 is empty and
SET2 is not, this value is correctly false even if all of the values
are outside the model with values less than -HUGE (SET1).
All of the reduction functions (e.g., MAXVAL, SUM) return values
when the arguments are zero-sized arrays that may be the same as the
values returned for some non-zero-sized arguments.
NOTE:
The NO votes in 00-254 were concerned that IEEE Infinities are not model
numbers and are therefore not valid results for MINVAL and MAXVAL. The
IEEE 754 standard is neither integrated into nor required by Fortran 95.
However concessions were made to allow some IEEE exceptional values to
be used by standard-conforming processors, like limited support for -0.0.
Fortran 2003 uses the same words in MAXVAL and MINVAL as in Fortran 95.
EDITS: None.
SUBMITTED BY: Larry Rolison
HISTORY: 97-240 m143 submitted
00-160r2 m153 Passed 7-5
00-254 m154 Failed J3 letter ballot
04-298r1 m168 Passed J3 meeting vote