From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-75086-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 9636 invoked by alias); 20 Aug 2010 11:58:54 -0000
Received: (qmail 9624 invoked by uid 22791); 20 Aug 2010 11:58:54 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0	tests=AWL,BAYES_00,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from mail.codesourcery.com (HELO mail.codesourcery.com) (38.113.113.100)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:58:50 +0000
Received: (qmail 5782 invoked from network); 20 Aug 2010 11:58:48 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO digraph.polyomino.org.uk) (joseph@127.0.0.2)  by mail.codesourcery.com with ESMTPA; 20 Aug 2010 11:58:48 -0000
Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost)	by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.69)	(envelope-from <joseph@codesourcery.com>)	id 1OmQFD-0000tN-9l; Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:58:47 +0000
Date: Fri, 20 Aug 2010 11:58:00 -0000
From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph@codesourcery.com>
To: Jan Kratochvil <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>
cc: Doug Evans <dje@google.com>, Andreas Schwab <schwab@redhat.com>,     gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix new FAIL `reject p 0x1.1' [fixup]  [Re: [patch] Handle 0 result from sscanf when parsing fp values.]
In-Reply-To: <20100820073703.GA19257@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1008201152480.2209@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
References: <20100817003114.087EA84B8F@ruffy.mtv.corp.google.com> <m3vd79hcti.fsf@hase.home> <AANLkTimPfvoVFExCZLC4EytcjH=KarwpMost6CVn6XOx@mail.gmail.com> <AANLkTikhm-hsb4NPgaG5syea=fJ5o+Gfq68D22Hwe1W4@mail.gmail.com> <20100820073430.GA28054@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net> <20100820073703.GA19257@host1.dyn.jankratochvil.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2010-08/txt/msg00368.txt.bz2

On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Jan Kratochvil wrote:

> [fixup]
> 
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 09:34:30 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> 0x1.1 is a perfectly valid hexadecimal floating point.  The new testcase:

It's not valid in C source code (a binary exponent is required), though it 
is valid as input to strtod (like INF, NAN, NAN(n-char-sequence_opt) etc.) 
- is the intention here that GDB deliberately accepts something beyond 
what would be valid in C source code?

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com