feat: add math/base/assert/is-oddf

[aayush0325]

Resolves #3313

Description

What is the purpose of this pull request?

This pull request:

• adds math/base/assert/is-oddf

Related Issues

Does this pull request have any related issues?

This pull request:

• resolves [RFC]: add math/base/assert/is-oddf #3313

Questions

Any questions for reviewers of this pull request?

There wasn't a macro for the addon of this particular function so I've just explicitly type-casted the double value to a float, is that correct? (please see src/addon.c)

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/assert/is-oddf	$\color{green}161/161$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}7/7$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}2/2$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$	$\color{green}161/161$ $\color{green}+100.00\%$

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

[gunjjoshi]

@aayush0325 We should pre-compute the values for the C and JS benchmarks, as we do here: https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/tree/develop/lib/node_modules/%40stdlib/math/base/assert/is-evenf/benchmark

[gunjjoshi]

There wasn't a macro for the addon of this particular function so I've just explicitly type-casted the double value to a float, is that correct? (please see src/addon.c)

@aayush0325 You can follow what we've done in https://github.com/stdlib-js/stdlib/blob/develop/lib/node_modules/%40stdlib/math/base/assert/is-evenf/src/addon.c. We've used available macros to avoid writing the whole logic again.

[aayush0325]

thanks for reviewing @gunjjoshi ! i've pushed the requested changes.

[gunjjoshi]

Apart from one change to update JS examples, everything else looks good to me.

[kgryte]

Looks like this PR is a duplicate of #3125. @gunjjoshi Would you mind checking which PR we should proceed with?

[aayush0325]

my apologies, closing this.