Author MrJean1
Recipients MrJean1, mark.dickinson
Date 2008-06-24.22:46:45
SpamBayes Score 6.10828e-05
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <39a48f50806241546l16ea2d7dhc56b256109da0e06@mail.gmail.com>
In-reply-to <39a48f50806241537h6dfb2a0fh57ad8e798cfc5b58@mail.gmail.com>
Content
Mark,

Take a look at the SUN forum, there is a (long) answer.

<http://forum.java.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5308106&tstart=0>

/Jean

On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 3:37 PM, Jean Brouwers <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>
> Jean Brouwers <MrJean1@Gmail.com> added the comment:
>
> Right on!  With errno = 0; in between both calls:
>
> -Inf 33
> Inf 0
>
> /Jean
>
> On Tue, Jun 24, 2008 at 1:17 PM, Mark Dickinson <report@bugs.python.org> wrote:
>>
>> Mark Dickinson <dickinsm@gmail.com> added the comment:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Jean Brouwers <report@bugs.python.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> result is different for 32- and 64-bit
>>>
>>> > cc -xtarget=native log_inf.c -lm ; a.out
>>> -Inf 33
>>> Inf 33
>>>
>>
>> That 33 for the second log call may just be the propagated errno value
>> from the first call.  Could you try setting errno = 0 before each of the
>> printf
>> calls?  I'd expect that log(HUGE_VAL) doesn't set errno at all.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>> Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file10722/unnamed
>>
>> _______________________________________
>> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
>> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3167>
>> _______________________________________
>
> _______________________________________
> Python tracker <report@bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org/issue3167>
> _______________________________________
>
History
Date User Action Args
2008-06-24 22:46:47MrJean1setspambayes_score: 6.10828e-05 -> 6.10828e-05
recipients: + MrJean1, mark.dickinson
2008-06-24 22:46:46MrJean1linkissue3167 messages
2008-06-24 22:46:45MrJean1create