Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 13:08:35 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se
Message-Id: <6551-Wed23Apr2003130834+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200303221153.h2MBriK22198@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
	(ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se)
Subject: Re: t-strtof discrepancies
References:  <200303221153 DOT h2MBriK22198 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2003 12:53:44 +0100 (CET)
> 
> 1. Tests 12, 13, 14 don't look like failures, but the numbers are
> different! Is it broken or not? Or is it sprintf() that is broken?

Can you show us the numbers with more digits, so we could see which
is the first one that differs?

> Usually doing "handle SIGEMT nostop" and "handle SIGFPE nostop" (IIRC)
> worked around this, but this time it won't. Perhaps because this time
> I'm trying to step through FPU instructions.

The only reliable way to debug this I'm aware of is to add cprintf
lines to the emulator and read the resulting logs.  Yes, those are
very long, so it's tedious, sigh...