------- Comment #9 from pcarlini at suse dot de 2006-06-05 23:15 ------- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #6) > It just seems bogus that it says %g and then goes on to do something different > and not to take into account that strlod is allowed more than just the > characters specified.
Maybe. But what do the specifications of strtod **exactly** say in C90 (the reference for C++03)? > The other problem I see with the current specification is what happens if you > have one of the other UTF-8 number systems also, it seems like it is going to > break at the same time? Remember the widening. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=27904
