public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug fortran/47642] real(kind=16) - libquadmath - segfault on amd64 FreeBSD
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 14:06:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-47642-4-XOszGu9iuB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-47642-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47642

--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-02-08 14:04:23 UTC ---
The question is how accurrate we expect the n argument to be (e.g. for
#include <quadmath.h>

int
main (void)
{
  char buf[1024];
  int i;
  __float128 f;
  for (i = 1, f = 2; i <= 256; i++, f *= 2)
    quadmath_flt128tostr (buf, sizeof (buf), 40, f);
  return 0;
}
before this ICE g_Qfmt will happily return a string with 42 digits (i.e. 41
digits after decimal point) and the various adjustments format does can e.g.
use just zeros instead of the digits that g_Qfmt could have computed but did
not.

Does anyone have confidence in gdtoa QoI?  I'd personally feel much safer by
just copying over and editting glibc stdio-common/printf_fp.c than fixing up
gdtoa.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2011-02-08 14:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-08  9:56 [Bug fortran/47642] New: " mexas at bristol dot ac.uk
2011-02-08 10:44 ` [Bug fortran/47642] " dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-02-08 12:51 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-08 12:54 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-08 13:37 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-08 14:06 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2011-02-08 18:28 ` burnus at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-08 20:25 ` jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-09  0:54 ` mexas at bristol dot ac.uk
2011-02-09  9:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 12:03 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 12:07 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 12:08 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 12:10 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 12:49 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-12 14:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-14 11:52 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-02-14 11:57 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-14 12:56 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-02-14 14:34 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-14 15:35 ` dominiq at lps dot ens.fr
2011-02-14 15:45 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-17 13:42 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2011-02-17 14:25 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2014-04-16 15:46 ` mexas at bristol dot ac.uk
2014-04-17  6:53 ` ubizjak at gmail 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=bug-47642-4-XOszGu9iuB@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --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).