X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Subject: Re: Precision of doubles and stdio From: skaller To: Roberto Bagnara Cc: tprince AT computer DOT org, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, "The Parma Polyhedra Library developers' list" In-Reply-To: <440ACF12.7000403@cs.unipr.it> References: <4408B886 DOT 5010209 AT cs DOT unipr DOT it> <4408C140 DOT 9030100 AT myrealbox DOT com> <440ACF12 DOT 7000403 AT cs DOT unipr DOT it> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 06 Mar 2006 00:10:16 +1100 Message-Id: <1141564216.10188.27.camel@budgie.wigram> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com 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 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/