[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1 |
Date: |
Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:49:44 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
Jim Meyering wrote:
> 0.1L == (long double) 0.1
> evaluates to true.
OK, so let's try a runtime test instead of a compile-time test.
What does this program give?
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
long double a = 4.0L;
long double b = 5.0L;
int main()
{
long double x = a / b;
long double y = strtold ("0.8", NULL);
printf ("%d\n", x == y);
printf ("x = %04X%04X%04X\n", ((unsigned int *) &x)[2],
((unsigned int *) &x)[1], ((unsigned int *) &x)[0]);
printf ("y = %04X%04X%04X\n", ((unsigned int *) &y)[2],
((unsigned int *) &y)[1], ((unsigned int *) &y)[0]);
return 0;
}
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Jim Meyering, 2007/11/20
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Paul Eggert, 2007/11/20
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Bruno Haible, 2007/11/20
- Message not available
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Bruno Haible, 2007/11/20
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Paul Eggert, 2007/11/20
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Bruno Haible, 2007/11/20
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Jim Meyering, 2007/11/21
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Jim Meyering, 2007/11/21
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Paul Eggert, 2007/11/21
- Re: "seq .1 .1" would mistakenly generate no output on FreeBSD 6.1, Paul Eggert, 2007/11/21