This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug target/12043] long double calcluation seems broken
- From: "pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 24 Aug 2003 15:48:00 -0000
- Subject: [Bug target/12043] long double calcluation seems broken
- References: <20030824012620.12043.jlquinn@optonline.net>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
PLEASE REPLY TO gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org ONLY, *NOT* gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12043
pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|RESOLVED |UNCONFIRMED
Resolution|INVALID |
------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2003-08-24 15:47 -------
I am going to reopen this based on what I got in my person email because I thought in long double
(XF which is 96 bits with 16 bits unused (not TF, which is 128bit))
I'm sending this directly to you since I don't want to reopen the bug
bug if I'm wrong, but...
I thought the hex looks like a valid long double. If I understand
ieee fp correctly (and I probably don't), the first word containing 0
has 16 bits of unused, 1 sign bit, and 15 exponent bits. I think that
the exponent bits must be 0x7fff to be INF or NAN. If so, then this
is actually a valid number.
Thanks,
Jerry