--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-29
14:17 ---
*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 323 ***
--
What|Removed |Added
--- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-29 13:42
---
(In reply to comment #10)
> Except, the value could have been spilled and reloaded from registers
> between those two source lines, which on x86, is where the problem comes
> from.
> The problem is no differe
--- Additional Comments From dberlin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-29
04:58 ---
Subject: Re: unexpected result from floating compare
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 23:05 +, piaget at us dot ibm dot com wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-28
> 23
On Mon, 2005-03-28 at 23:05 +, piaget at us dot ibm dot com wrote:
> --- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-28
> 23:05 ---
> 323 compares 2 values across a function call ... somthing a programmer can
> reasonably consider. My problem occurs with 2 successiv
--- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-28 23:05
---
323 compares 2 values across a function call ... somthing a programmer can
reasonably consider. My problem occurs with 2 successive lines of code
admittedly with 2 compares per line). I don't have a problem
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28
22:49 ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> I tried this on a 64-bit system, and noticed I needed to compile -m32 to get
> the error (this was on an older gcc level, though. 3.2.3)
Well considering x86_64 uses the sse regi
--- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-28 22:46
---
my mistake in the previous post
how can both if-checks be false?
val <= 1.0
and
val > 1.0
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20674
--- Additional Comments From piaget at us dot ibm dot com 2005-03-28 22:44
---
I tried this on a 64-bit system, and noticed I needed to compile -m32 to get
the error (this was on an older gcc level, though. 3.2.3)
I don't understand how this can be a precision problem. How can both if
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-03-28
22:34 ---
If you write the function like so:
enum myRC doSomeMath
(
int i1,
float *f1,
float* f2,
float* f3,
float* f4
)
{
int i;
float f5=0.0;
float f6=0.0;
float f7=0.0;
for(i=0; i=-1.0)&&(*f4<=1.0))
