Subject: Re: Precision of doubles and stdio
From: skaller <[email-masked]>
To: Roberto Bagnara <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], "The Parma Polyhedra Library developers' list" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 00:10:16 +1100

On Sun, 2006-03-05 at 12:44 +0100, Roberto Bagnara wrote:
> Tim Prince wrote:
>  My 
> > past reading of various relevant documents convinced me that digits 
> > beyond the 17th in formatting of doubles are not required by any 
> > standard to be consistent between implementations.  They have no useful 
> > function, as 17 digits are sufficient to determine uniquely the 
> > corresponding binary value in IEEE 754 format.
> 
> Thank you Tim.  We were unaware of this giant bug in the C standard.
> All the best,

There is no bug in the C Standard. The C standard makes it 
clear the accuracy of floating point operations is 
implementation defined ,and the implementor may even say the 
accuracy is undefined.

This is not a bug, it is the proper thing for a language
standard. 

-- 
John Skaller <skaller at users dot sourceforge dot net>
Async PL, Realtime software consultants
Checkout Felix: http://felix.sourceforge.net

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/