Hi Joe,
The webrev http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~bpb/6476168/ is updated per the
following.
On Jul 22, 2013, at 6:13 PM, Joseph Darcy wrote:
> The changes in that block include
>
> 1353 // 6476168: subnormal formatting and precision
>
> It is not customary, and usually not desirable, to include the bug id.
> Additionally, the new block of test cases tests for subnormal as well as
> underflow the comment is not accurate.
Comment expunged.
> It is not necessary to write
>
> Double.parseDouble("0x0.123p-1022")
>
> you can just write
>
> 0x0.123p-1022
>
> using the hexadecimal notation for a floating-point literal.
Changed in the cases I added and in the preexisting cases.
> I'd like to see a few more test cases that probe at boundaries, such as
> Double.MAX_VALUE rounding to 9, 6, 2, 1, digits of precision.
Please see lines 1372-1379 of Basic-X.
> There are also cases of interest to make sure the round to nearest even
> rounding policy is being used. If a value like 0.123xxxxxxxxxxxx is rounded
> to three digits, the value of xxxxxxxxxxxx will determine whether or not an
> increment occurs.
Please see lines 1355-1368 of Basic-X.
>> Added as Basic-X line 1360.
>>
>>> * Double.MAX_VALUE rounded to fewer than 12 digits. Offhand, I'm not sure
>>> what the implementation will do here; returning infinity or a hex string
>>> with an extra big exponent are both defensible.
>> Added as Basic-X line 1361. The returned value for %1.9a is
>> 0x1.000000000p1024.
>
> Of the two options, that value is preferable.
Interestingly the C stdio library
printf("%1.9a\n", 1.7976931348623157e+308)
prints
0x2.000000000p+1023
on Mac OS 10.7.5.
Thanks,
Brian
