On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 06:51, jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@charter.net wrote:
It should be easy to implement:
After the switch between F and E editing, we just need to shift the
decimal point and decrement the exponent. No new rounding is required,
because we keep the number of significant
On 06/11/2011 12:23 AM, Thomas Henlich wrote:
I don't agree with this; with the patch we now output 10 significant
digits, whereas 9 is sufficient for a binary-ascii-binary roundtrip.
So please retain the reduce d by one when E editing is used thing
for list format and G0. This is just a side
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 20:27, jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@charter.net wrote:
On 06/03/2011 05:51 AM, jerry DeLisle wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch, which includes test cases, fixes this bug by
eliminating the
code which used floating point instructions to determine the 'r' value as
outlined in
I don't agree with this; with the patch we now output 10 significant
digits, whereas 9 is sufficient for a binary-ascii-binary roundtrip.
So please retain the reduce d by one when E editing is used thing
for list format and G0. This is just a side effect of using 1PGw.d
format for list format
On 06/11/2011 12:23 AM, Thomas Henlich wrote:
I don't agree with this; with the patch we now output 10 significant
digits, whereas 9 is sufficient for a binary-ascii-binary roundtrip.
So please retain the reduce d by one when E editing is used thing
for list format and G0. This is just a side
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 14:41, jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@charter.net wrote:
This was established as solution to PR48488 where we had two choices for
selecting the significant digits. Nine significant digits was established as
a requirement to guarantee round trip in all cases. The
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 8:56 AM, Thomas Henlich wrote:
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 14:41, jerry DeLisle jvdeli...@charter.net
wrote:
This was established as solution to PR48488 where we had two choices
for
selecting the significant digits. Nine significant digits was
established as
a requirement
On 06/03/2011 05:51 AM, jerry DeLisle wrote:
Hi,
The attached patch, which includes test cases, fixes this bug by eliminating the
code which used floating point instructions to determine the 'r' value as
outlined in the Fortran standard under G formatting.
Essentially, the code now examines
