X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org X-YMail-OSG: 1KPAizQVM1msIS8rZ1tI79juVAIoUvU8IpgRs.tHeC._cVgMD3.Oi24UjR7qzelR4WOE24VMK3hRRyA.GkO7Yim14rMt6X3eZZYmtOyS9HF0dcOpQxynZU4AdkSWLqiw Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2007 18:52:53 -0700 (PDT) From: "Cary R." Subject: Re: newlib?: pow function can produce incorrect results. To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <535561.71594.qm@web59102.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Id: 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 > gcc -fno-builtin ./pow-error.c Yes -fno-builtin certainly makes the results consistent, but I would consider this result slightly less correct. > Unless the function call is optimized away. Hmm, I guess I didn't think something as complicated as pow would get optimized away. Thanks for the insight! I also need to remember to look at the assembly code. > Are you only seeking insight, or is there a > particular problem you want to solve? Mostly insight. These are certainly extreme limits and if they are wrong it's not a problem for what I'm working on. The reason I even found them is that I try to test my code at all the weird limits to make sure things break gracefully and as expected. In this case I got inconstant results that didn't match my expectations. It would be nice if this could be made more compliant, but I also realize that it's not anyones job to do that. Thanks for the replies, Cary __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com -- 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/