From:	Erik Max Francis <max AT alcyone DOT com>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Problems with DJGPP V2.01 - atof() function
Date:	Tue, 03 Dec 1996 09:18:18 -0800
Organization:	Alcyone Systems
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<32A460DA.6D5AA16B@alcyone.com>
References:	<329e68a5 DOT 10316617 AT news DOT ua DOT pt> <32A03F1D DOT 4967 AT pobox DOT oleane DOT com> <32a3151a DOT 978532 AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> <32A33C44 DOT 68FE AT exis DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	newton.alcyone.com
Mime-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

Joe Wright wrote:

> Not so fast.  Before the answer, we have the real question:  Not why is
> the result 'wrong' but why are they different?  Why does i=(int)(f*100);
> yield a different result than f=f*100; i=(int)f; ?  Why?  Clearly the
> compiler is doing conversions differently in the two cases.

As I said earlier, I'm not seeing any difference here (at least with gcc
2.7.2 under Linux).

-- 
                             Erik Max Francis | max AT alcyone DOT com
                              Alcyone Systems | http://www.alcyone.com/max/
                         San Jose, California | 37 20 07 N 121 53 38 W
                                 &tSftDotIotE | R^4: the 4th R is respect
         "But since when can wounded eyes see | If we weren't who we were"

- Raw text -