This is the mail archive of the java-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: e_pow.c bug

From: Steve Moshier <steve at moshier dot net>
To: Bryce McKinlay <mckinlay at redhat dot com>
Cc: Mark Wielaard <mark at klomp dot org>, java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2004 20:00:33 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: e_pow.c bug
References: <Pine.LNX.4.58.0404110939430.21214@moshier.net> <407AB2DB.4000009@redhat.com> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0404121230050.24434@moshier.net><1081788789.13170.643.camel@elsschot.wildebeest.org> <407AE332.1080006@redhat.com>

On Mon, 12 Apr 2004, Bryce McKinlay wrote:

> Given that the spec seems quite explicit about it, and current
> implementations still use the buggy behaviour, I think we should
> continue with the status quo at this time. I'd be interested to see what
> happens with a bug report filed against the JRE, though.

The person at Sun said he would try to contact someone involved
with Java, but I don't know that he would be familiar with any
formal reporting procedure for this.

References:
- e_pow.c bug
  - From: Steve Moshier
- Re: e_pow.c bug
  - From: Bryce McKinlay
- Re: e_pow.c bug
  - From: Steve Moshier
- Re: e_pow.c bug
  - From: Mark Wielaard
- Re: e_pow.c bug
  - From: Bryce McKinlay

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]