------- Comment #1 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-05 23:24
-------
> Looking at the difference, there also seems to be some problem with
> arithmetic..
No, it's only that the default format is not wide enough :)
Compared to other compilers, we could probably do something like:
Index: io/write.c
===================================================================
--- io/write.c (revision 106521)
+++ io/write.c (working copy)
@@ -1375,8 +1375,8 @@
f.u.real.e = 3;
break;
case 10:
- f.u.real.w = 24;
- f.u.real.d = 15;
+ f.u.real.w = 40;
+ f.u.real.d = 31;
f.u.real.e = 4;
break;
case 16:
And, accidentaly, the above patch fixes your testcase completely, although I
don't know why.
--
fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
GCC host triplet|i686-pc-linux-gnu |
GCC target triplet| |i686-pc-linux-gnu
Last reconfirmed|0000-00-00 00:00:00 |2005-11-05 23:24:13
date| |
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24685
