On 4/23/07, Dave Korn wrote:
On 24 April 2007 00:53, Cary R. wrote:
> I had some more time to look into this and when the
> simple C program I mentioned earlier uses variables
> like the other program, incorrect results are
> produced. I have attached this C/C++ program. I
> certainly don't understand what is going on. I would
> have expected pow to be pass-by value which should
> make the two calls identical from a system standpoint,
> but the results imply something different. Any
> suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
The notorious PR323.
Nah, in this case it's just that gcc's __builtin_pow() is more
standards-compliant than newlib's pow().
L
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
