References: <5274464b-65bb-4261-bbeb-8e9f68e65bf2@clear.net.nz>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
            Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID:  <5ca79804-6bb6-f62b-f85f-cbae9a61c725@gmail.com>
Date:         Sat, 13 May 2017 11:32:49 -0400
Reply-To:     Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sender:       Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
From:         Bruno Le Floch <blflatex@GMAIL.COM>
Subject: Re: l3fp flags: ln(1) raises underflow flag
To:           LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <5274464b-65bb-4261-bbeb-8e9f68e65bf2@clear.net.nz>
Precedence: list
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

On 05/06/2017 06:00 PM, Andrew Parsloe wrote:
> I have finally got to grips with l3fp's exception handling. (The main
> difficulty was realising that an exception like division_by_zero is a
> different creature from the flag fp_division_by_zero.) However, I was
> surprised to find that \fp_eval:n { ln(1) } raises the underflow flag:
> \flag_height:n { fp_underflow } displays 1.
> 
> Andrew

Thanks for reporting.  This is a bug.  Somewhat known to me at least at
some point since I wrote in the source the following comment

%^^A todo: ln(1) should be "exact zero", not "underflow"

I need to revisit l3fp soonish, but sadly a realistic estimate of when
that'll be fixed is 1 year.  I've opened issue #364
(https://github.com/latex3/latex3/issues/364)

Bruno