[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #11 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net 2011-05-02 11:28:08 UTC --- It is now compliant with IEEE 754/2008.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-11 18:49:30 UTC --- Regression tested OK. Can I get a release manager OK for this? If not, it can wait for 4.7.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #9 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-11 19:12:36 UTC --- (In reply to comment #8) Regression tested OK. Can I get a release manager OK for this? If not, it can wait for 4.7. This is fine for 4.6.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-12 00:49:55 UTC --- Author: jvdelisle Date: Sat Mar 12 00:49:51 2011 New Revision: 170895 URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gccview=revrev=170895 Log: 2011-03-11 Jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@gcc.gnu.org PR libgfortran/48047 * io/write_float.def (write_float): Change MIN_FIELD_WIDTH to 48. Modified: trunk/libgfortran/ChangeLog trunk/libgfortran/io/write_float.def
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #4 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net 2011-03-10 09:36:52 UTC --- Created attachment 23610 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23610 Patch to fix rounding issue Proposing this patch (untested) for field width. Trading 2 extra bytes for (partial) IEEE 754-2008 compliance seems like a good thing. It facilitates writing programs portable to other (IEEE 754-2008 compliant) compilers.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #5 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net 2011-03-10 09:39:03 UTC --- Created attachment 23611 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23611 Comprehensive test for IEEE 754-2008 clause 5.12.2 compliant output rounding
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net changed: What|Removed |Added Attachment #23611|0 |1 is obsolete|| --- Comment #6 from Thomas Henlich thenlich at users dot sourceforge.net 2011-03-10 09:41:40 UTC --- Created attachment 23612 -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23612 Comprehensive test for IEEE 754-2008 clause 5.12.2 compliant output rounding (corrected)
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 --- Comment #7 from Jerry DeLisle jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-11 00:59:04 UTC --- I am OK with this simple patch, but will have to run the testsuite to make sure its all OK on our other testsuite cases. (Not very many at the moment)
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #1 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-09 18:01:42 UTC --- gfortran does not claim conformance to IEEE 754, and gfortran currently does not include even a crude implementation of the IEEE 754 intrinsic modules. gfortran doesn't even guarantee 36 decimal digits in its REAL(16) type program z print '(I0,1X,I0)', digits(1.e0_8), digits(1.e0_16) print '(I0,1X,I0)', precision(1.e0_8), precision(1.e0_16) end program z troutmask:sgk[213] gfc4x -o z d.f90 ./z 53 113 15 33 It is unclear what you want to happen here.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #2 from Tobias Burnus burnus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-09 19:06:12 UTC --- For what it is worth: On x86-64-linux (openSUSE Factory, GLIBC 2.11.3), I get: Got: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854120 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854116 Got: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854120 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854117 Using ifort 11.1 on the same machine: Got: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854100 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854116 Got: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854200 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854117 Using crayftn 7.2.4, I get on another x86-64-linux (SLES 10/Cray): Got: 0.1428571428571428490 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854116 Got: +.1428571428571428490 Expected: 0.142857142857142849212692681248881854117 My impression is that all twelve numbers are numerically identical and lead to the same binary representation. Hence, I believe the three compilers print the correct result.
[Bug libfortran/48047] Incorrect output rounding of double precision numbers
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48047 Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org --- Comment #3 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-03-09 20:06:52 UTC --- 38 comes from: 1056 if (ndigits MIN_FIELD_WIDTH - 4 - edigits) 1057ndigits = MIN_FIELD_WIDTH - 4 - edigits; (46 - 4 - 4). snprintf/quadmath_snprintf returns only what it is asked for.
