Date:	Sat, 30 Jun 2001 16:31:09 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<7704-Sat30Jun2001163109+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to:	<3b3d95b2.362800381@news.primus.ca> (invalid@erehwon.invalid)
Subject:	Re: DJGPP reserves wrong int size
References:	<9dde68b7 DOT 0106241053 DOT 2a385311 AT posting DOT google DOT com> <200106242138 DOT RAA18013 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <3b37e92e DOT 288745911 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> <200106260242 DOT WAA00615 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <3b3b4e40 DOT 213415946 AT news DOT primus DOT ca> <6480-Fri29Jun2001102012+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3b3d95b2 DOT 362800381 AT news DOT primus DOT ca>
Note-from-DJ:	This may be spam
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: invalid AT erehwon DOT invalid (Graaagh the Mighty)
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Sat, 30 Jun 2001 09:06:13 GMT
> 
> On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 10:20:12 +0300, "Eli Zaretskii"
> <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> sat on a tribble, which squeaked:
> 
> >This is usually a sign of a numeric bug in the code.
> 
> No kidding, but in this case it went away when I switched to plain
> doubles universally.

Yes, I understand.  And that precisely is the sign of a numerical bug,
in most cases I've seen.

> Hey, wait a damn minute, the info file said %f for doubles *and* long
> doubles.

No, it says doubles *or* long doubles.

> In any case, the core question remains unanswered: why was some code
> that didn't even use printf broken with long doubles but working with
> plain doubles? All it did was add, multiply, compare, and assign them
> with literals and variables. Not so much as a pointer or a conversion
> involved, and I don't think it even did any division...

Numerical computations are tricky.

- Raw text -