Bug#322218: more robust code (gcc -O2 optimization bug)

2005-08-10 Thread Petr Salinger
Hi,

in floating point code is better to avoid testing with equality.
In your example, you should change 

if (fa == 0.0)
if (fb == 0.0)

into:

if (fabs(fa) < DBL_EPSILON)
if (fabs(fb) < DBL_EPSILON)

After that, it works with gcc -O2.

Regards 
Petr




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#322218: more robust code (gcc -O2 optimization bug)

2005-08-10 Thread John Houck
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 09:47 +0200, Petr Salinger wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> in floating point code is better to avoid testing with equality.
> In your example, you should change 
> 
> if (fa == 0.0)
> if (fb == 0.0)
> 
> into:
> 
> if (fabs(fa) < DBL_EPSILON)
> if (fabs(fb) < DBL_EPSILON)
> 
> After that, it works with gcc -O2.
> 
> Regards 
>   Petr
> 

In retrospect, I should have known better, but for some reason
I didn't see the problem.

Thanks,
-John



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Processing of gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.changes

2005-08-10 Thread Archive Administrator
gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.changes uploaded successfully to localhost
along with the files:
  gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.deb

Greetings,

Your Debian queue daemon


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.changes ACCEPTED

2005-08-10 Thread Debian Installer

Accepted:
gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.deb
  to pool/main/g/gcc-snapshot/gcc-snapshot_20050726-1_sparc.deb


Thank you for your contribution to Debian.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



Bug#322482: Please make libstdc++6-dev standard and libstdc++5-3.3-dev optional

2005-08-10 Thread Adeodato Simó
Package: ftp.debian.org,libstdc++6-dev,libstdc++5-3.3-dev
Severity: minor

Hello,

  I think that the priorities of libstdc++5-3.3-dev and libstdc++6-dev
  should be interchanged now that GCC 4.0 is our default compiler. So:

libstdc++5-3.3-dev: standard -> optional
libstdc++6-dev: optional -> standard

  Thanks.

-- 
Adeodato Simó
EM: asp16 [ykwim] alu.ua.es | PK: DA6AE621
 
We learned that the Linux load average rolls over at 1024. And we
actually found this out empirically.
-- H. Peter Anvin from kernel.org



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]



[Bug java/2499] Class members should be inherited from implemented interfaces

2005-08-10 Thread pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org

--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org  2005-08-10 
23:55 ---
And now it just rejects it.

-- 
   What|Removed |Added

   Keywords|ice-on-valid-code   |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2499

--- You are receiving this mail because: ---
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]