--- Comment #9 from brian at dessent dot net 2008-03-07 01:20 ---
Subject: A incorrect result in a simple division, only in
32-bit gcc.
> Although I knew GCC use 80-bit format internally, I thought the result should
> be same in 80-bit format.
No, it's not that gcc uses 80 bit or 6
--- Comment #8 from purnnam1 at naver dot com 2008-03-07 00:37 ---
Actually the 80-bit internal format will be better in converting a decimal
number into the floating point number. In this point, the 80-bit internal
format may be useful.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?
--- Comment #2 from adam at irvine dot com 2008-03-07 00:08 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> > but others are
> actual bugs in which the compiler is generating incorrect instructions
> (such as #12331);
>
> That is not incorrect instructions. Just different than what you are
> expecting.
--- Comment #7 from purnnam1 at naver dot com 2008-03-07 00:05 ---
Although I knew GCC use 80-bit format internally, I thought the result should
be same in 80-bit format.
Due to the very kind explanation about my problem, I can understand that the
result can be changed because the roundi
--- Comment #107 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:58
---
*** Bug 35489 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or ar
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:58 ---
> but others are
actual bugs in which the compiler is generating incorrect instructions
(such as #12331);
That is not incorrect instructions. Just different than what you are
expecting. All can be defected by the
--- Comment #6 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:18 ---
One more comment about this code, you are violating C/C++ aliasing rules.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35488
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the
--- Comment #5 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:15 ---
The division is done and then rounded to 80bits and then rounded again to
64bits.
This is not really a bug. It is just a misunderstanding on how x87 FPU works.
fldl-24(%ebp)
fldl-32(%ebp)
--- Comment #4 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:14 ---
The i?86 FPU computes values in 80bit precision by default. Starting with
GCC 4.3 you can use -mpc64 to reduce its precision to 64bits thereby obtaining
the valid IEEE-754 result. Or you can use -mfpmath=sse to use
--- Comment #106 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 23:14
---
*** Bug 35488 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=323
--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or ar
--- Comment #3 from purnnam1 at naver dot com 2008-03-06 23:09 ---
This problem is not kind of a duplicate of #323.
--
purnnam1 at naver dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from purnnam1 at naver dot com 2008-03-06 23:07 ---
It's not simple floating point related error!
I fully understand that the decimal number can't be converted to the exact
floating point number. so, the result may be different from our expectation.
This problem has no r
--- Comment #105 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 22:44
---
*** Bug 35488 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--- Comment #1 from pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-03-06 22:44 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 323 ***
--
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Accepted:
java-gcj-compat-dev_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
to pool/main/j/java-gcj-compat/java-gcj-compat-dev_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
java-gcj-compat-headless_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
to pool/main/j/java-gcj-compat/java-gcj-compat-headless_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
java-gcj-compat-plugin_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
to pool/main
java-gcj-compat_1.0.77-5_amd64.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
java-gcj-compat_1.0.77-5.dsc
java-gcj-compat_1.0.77-5.diff.gz
java-gcj-compat-dev_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
java-gcj-compat-headless_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
java-gcj-compat_1.0.77-5_amd64.deb
java-gcj-co
Processing commands for [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> tag 469567 + pending
Bug#469567: gcc-4.3: old behavior wrt cld/std should be restored
There were no tags set.
Tags added: pending
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contact me if you need assistance.
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(a
17 matches
Mail list logo
