feat: add math/base/special/tribonaccif

[Neerajpathak07]

Progresses #649.

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• adds math/base/special/tribonaccif which is the single-precision version of tribonacci

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request:

• progresses [RFC]: Add C implementations to base special math functions (tracking issue) #649

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.

No.

Checklist

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

• Read, understood, and followed the contributing guidelines

---

@stdlib-js/reviewers

[stdlib-bot]

Coverage Report

Package	Statements	Branches	Functions	Lines
math/base/special/tribonaccif	$\color{green}224/224$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}10/10$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}2/2$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}224/224$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$

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

[Neerajpathak07]

went with 31 values here.

[Neerajpathak07]

cc:- @kgryte @Planeshifter LMK what am I missing here!!

[Neerajpathak07]

@Planeshifter Hey could I pls know why the potential Dupliate label was added as this package had not been worked upon and I did specifically add max_nth_safe_tribonacci pkg for float32 to implement tribonaccif, also for other constants/float32 packages?

[kgryte]

@Neerajpathak07 Simple, because you consistently use resolves incorrectly. No one of your PR "resolves" or "closes" #649. Instead, you should be using "progresses". Only if your PR actually completely addresses an issue should you be using one of those keywords.

Because you consistently use resolves #649, your PRs are being flagged as potential duplicates.

See also https://docs.github.com/en/get-started/writing-on-github/working-with-advanced-formatting/using-keywords-in-issues-and-pull-requests.

[Neerajpathak07]

@kgryte ahh I see alright then I shall update all the other PR's for this.
Thank you soo much for addressing this.

[Neerajpathak07]

Have taken values till here as the FLOAT32_MAX_SAFE_INTEGER is 16777215 so any value beyond this just returns NaN

[Neerajpathak07]

Haven't added cases for is_nanf and to check if n is int. As while operating on int32_t variables we don't want to return NaN for integers and NaN itself.

[Neerajpathak07]

@kgryte Kindly review this and LMK if I am missing something!!

[Neerajpathak07]

Also removed the example for testing tribonaccif value for 3.14 integer. As it just truncates the value and return s 0 which is undesirable.

[gunjjoshi]

@Neerajpathak07 Looks like this PR is missing benchmark/c/native directory and the files inside it.

[Neerajpathak07]

@gunjjoshi Let me get back to you with the updated changes!!