On Wednesday, February 5, 2003, at 08:22 PM, Dave Abrahams wrote:
On Wednesday, February 05, 2003 2:04 PM [GMT+1=CET], Matthias Troyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Actually there were two problems. One was the one you mentioned above. The other was that we needed either a masking to 32 bits or the type made unsigned to prevent an optimization (integer calculations done on FPU), which led to non-conforming overflow behavior.
I never got very clear feedback from your guys about what was happening,
but:
we very quite confused for a long time, but it is becoming clear now.
Great, then the compiler is actually conforming and the jam hashing code was incorrect with signed integers. The SV1 uses the FPU only for signed integers.
If the calculations are only done in the FPU when the integers are signed,
then the overflow behavior is conforming, since signed integer overflow is
undefined behavior.
I believe I need to go and buy a copy of the C standard some time.
Thanks,
Matthias
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe & other changes: http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost
