http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #20 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-04 06:56:56 UTC ---
Added two tests just in case this comes up again.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #19 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-04 06:54:03 UTC ---
Created attachment 23538
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23538
Test 2 for pedantic IO rounding
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #18 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-04 06:53:33 UTC ---
Created attachment 23537
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23537
Test 1 for pedantic IO rounding
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Thomas Henlich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #16 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-03 14:58:35 UTC ---
My _mingw.h has the following:
#if defined(_POSIX) && !defined(__USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO)
/* Enable __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO if _POSIX defined
* and If user did _not_ specify it explici
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Janne Blomqvist changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jb at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #14 from Steve Kargl
2011-03-02 18:17:30 UTC ---
On Wed, Mar 02, 2011 at 06:02:22PM +, burnus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
>
> --- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-02
> 18:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-02
18:02:15 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> could it be that it was the intention to set __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO in effect?
Yes - and that is what does happen for _POSIX=1 on MinGW64. But it does not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #12 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-02 17:54:34 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> From libgfortran/libgfortran.h:
>
> #if defined __MINGW32__
> # define _POSIX 1
> # define gfc_printf gnu_printf
> #else
Since the comment above that
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #11 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-02
17:03:47 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> It seems that MinGW has its own implementation of snprintf called
> __mingw_snprintf which can be activated by defining __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO
In MinGW64,
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #10 from Tobias Burnus 2011-03-02
16:45:26 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> It seems that MinGW has its own implementation of snprintf called
> __mingw_snprintf [...] __mingw_snprintf has the desired behaviour
>From libgfortran/lib
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #9 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-02 13:49:15 UTC ---
It seems that MinGW has its own implementation of snprintf called
__mingw_snprintf which can be activated by defining __USE_MINGW_ANSI_STDIO
__mingw_snprintf has the desired behaviou
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Tobias Burnus changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Co
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Thomas Henlich changed:
What|Removed |Added
Severity|normal |minor
--- Comment #6 from Thomas Henlich
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #4 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-01 14:44:54 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> 0.142857142857142849218750 is still within the accuracy of IEEE
> double.
> All numbers map to the same IEEE double.
This is technically correct;
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #3 from Andreas Schwab 2011-03-01 14:27:54
UTC ---
0.142857142857142849218750 is still within the accuracy of IEEE double.
All numbers map to the same IEEE double.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #2 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-01 14:01:56 UTC ---
Created attachment 23502
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23502
C test case
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47945
--- Comment #1 from Thomas Henlich
2011-03-01 14:01:32 UTC ---
Created attachment 23501
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=23501
Test case
20 matches
Mail list logo
