public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "aph at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libgcj/16122] gij - Incorrect result due to computations in extended precision on x86
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2006 15:45:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060214154551.27983.qmail@sourceware.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-16122-5724@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>



------- Comment #4 from aph at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-02-14 15:45 -------
A bit more explanation.

The problem is caused by the fact that 9007199254740994.0 + 0.9999847412109375
is carried out in extended precision, and the result is rounded to
9007199254740995.  In double precision, the result of this calculation is
rounded to 9007199254740994.

When the extended-precision value is rounded to double for storing, it is
rounded (again) to 9007199254740996.

So, double rounding leads gij to return a value of d that is 2.0, whereas it
should be 0.0.

Note however, that the true accurate value for d, calculated at infinite
precision, is 1-(2^-16).  So, the absolute error for gcj is 1+(2^-16) and the
absolute error with correct rounding is 1-(2^-16).  (I'm not surprised this
hasn't been reported as a problem with any real applications!)

It might be worth setting the floating-point precision of gcj to double, but
that would only fix the double-precision case, and I presume we'd still have
the same double rounding problem for floats.  

And in any case, I do not know if libcalls would be affected by being entered
with the FPU in round-to-double mode.  We might end up breaking things.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=16122


       reply	other threads:[~2006-02-14 15:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <bug-16122-5724@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
2006-02-14 15:45 ` aph at gcc dot gnu dot org [this message]
2006-02-14 17:03 ` vincent at vinc17 dot org
2004-06-21 19:58 [Bug libgcj/16122] New: " debian-gcc at lists dot debian dot org
2004-06-21 20:24 ` [Bug libgcj/16122] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org
2004-06-22  6:04 ` vincent at vinc17 dot org
2004-06-22  6:05 ` vincent at vinc17 dot org
2004-06-22 16:51 ` mckinlay at redhat dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060214154551.27983.qmail@sourceware.org \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).