Done; < https://bugs.call-cc.org/ticket/1627#ticket >.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:26 PM Evan Hanson wrote:
> On 2019-06-27 21:27, John Cowan wrote:
> > No, you do. If a Schemer writes (/ 1.0 -0.0) the result must be
> > -inf.0, not +inf.0.
>
> OK, but I think that's a separate issue, because cu
On 2019-06-27 21:27, John Cowan wrote:
> No, you do. If a Schemer writes (/ 1.0 -0.0) the result must be
> -inf.0, not +inf.0.
OK, but I think that's a separate issue, because currently if a CHICKEN
user writes (/ 1.0 -0.0) they get +inf.0. And -0.0 gets them 0.0.
It sounds like this might be wo
No, you do. If a Schemer writes (/ 1.0 -0.0) the result must be -inf.0,
not +inf.0. But that fact leads to a better way to compile a negative zero
into C:
(1.0 / (-INFINITY)). No unions needed.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 6:50 PM Evan Hanson wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> On 2019-06-27 18:28, John Cowan w
Hi John,
On 2019-06-27 18:28, John Cowan wrote:
> Don't forget to cast them to double, however.
Good point. Updated version attached.
> To get a negative zero you need an initialized global variable:
I'm not sure we need a negative zero here, do we?
Evan
>From 40ee7d67559a49515f2a8f6738f43139a
Don't forget to cast them to double, however.
To get a negative zero you need an initialized global variable:
double negative_zero = 1.0 / -INFINITY;
and then negative_zero is the Right Thing.
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 5:20 PM Evan Hanson wrote:
> Putting this here so it doesn't get lost.
>
>
Putting this here so it doesn't get lost.
Evan
>From 8e226395197515fe5aac0ac6e0bf3a17a7584394 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Evan Hanson
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 16:34:36 +1200
Subject: [PATCH] Emit C99 constants for +nan.0 and [+-]inf.0 `##core#float'
nodes
The unboxing pass added in 79cf7427 in
Hi there,
Here's a fix for an issue I found while testing megane's inlining patch.
It just makes the Windows tests match the Unix ones. Currently,
%compile_r% always generates a file called a.out, which isn't correct,
or at least isn't what we want for the new inlining test.
Cheers,
Evan
>From
On 2019-06-27 7:31, megane wrote:
> Good catch! Didn't intend to change other logic.
>
> Fixed version attached.
Thanks, here's a sign-off. I put the variable-mark check back to the way
it was, to minimise the diff, and added the new test for Windows.
Evan
>From 892bead3d97c6d006eea3540449e5326
