[Mustansir-06]

Resolves a part of #11743.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• replaces inline NaN generation (0.0f / 0.0f) in math/base/special/maxf/src/main.c with the stdlib NaN constant STDLIB_CONSTANT_FLOAT32_NAN from @stdlib/constants/float32/nan.
• adds #include "stdlib/constants/float32/nan.h" alongside the existing stdlib includes in src/main.c.
• adds @stdlib/constants/float32/nan as a dependency in the build, benchmark and examples configurations in manifest.json.

No inline NaN generation remained in this package's C examples, C benchmark or README, so only src/main.c and manifest.json changed.

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request has the following related issues:

• [RFC]: replace inline NaN generation with stdlib NaN constants in C source files (tracking issue) #11743

Reference Packages

Did the content of this pull request follow one or more existing packages? Answering is optional.

This pull request followed these packages:

• stats/strided/dnanmeanpn (refactor: use constants/float64/nan #11768) and stats/strided/snanmeanpn (refactor: use constants/float32/nan #11769).

What carried over from the reference(s)?

• The same replacement of the inline NaN with the NaN macro, the include placement, and the manifest dependency update.

What differed, or what did you have to work out yourself?

• This package has three manifest.json configurations and a single inline NaN, so I checked that no other file in the package needed changes.

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

No.

Other

Any other information relevant to this pull request? This may include screenshots, references, and/or implementation notes.

I'm on Windows and could not run the project's make build and lint locally. To check that behavior is unchanged, I compiled src/main.c with gcc together with its dependencies, before and after the change, and confirmed that stdlib_base_maxf( NaN, 1.0f ) returns NaN and stdlib_base_maxf( 3.0f, 4.0f ) returns 4.0f in both cases. I'm relying on CI for the rest.

Checklist

Please ensure the following tasks are completed before submitting this pull request.

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines.

AI Assistance

When authoring the changes proposed in this PR, did you use any kind of AI assistance?

• Yes
• No

If you answered "yes" above, how did you use AI assistance?

• Code generation (e.g., when writing an implementation or fixing a bug)
• Test/benchmark generation
• Documentation (including examples)
• Research and understanding

Disclosure

If you answered "yes" to using AI assistance, please provide a short disclosure indicating how you used AI assistance. This helps reviewers determine how much scrutiny to apply when reviewing your contribution. Example disclosures: "This PR was written primarily by Claude Code." or "I consulted ChatGPT to understand the codebase, but the proposed changes were fully authored manually by myself.".

N/A

@stdlib-bot/reviewers

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
math/base/special/maxf	$\\color{green}176/176$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}16/16$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}2/2$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$	$\\color{green}176/176$ $\\color{green}+100.00\\%$

The above coverage report was generated for the changes in this PR.

[kgryte]

LGTM