Re: [PATCH] Improve geometric types

> BTW how did we end up with the regression differences? Presumably you've
> tried that on your machine and it passed. So if we adjust the expected
> file, won't it fail on some other machines?

I had another patch to check for -0 inside float{4,8}_{div,mul}().  I
dropped it on the last set of patches, so the tests were broken.  I
get -0 as a result of -x * 0 both on Mac and Linux.