------- 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