Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Wouldn't it be more useful if, instead of listing Linux/x86, the > glibc version that had this bug was listed (and maybe the GCC > version used);
It would be useful if there was some hope that glibc be more defensive against these bit patterns that are outside the IEEE 754 concepts. In [1], Ulrich Drepper's opinion: "Garbage in, whatever out, including crashes." In [2], Jakub Jelinek's opinion is that these cases should be handled as easily and cheaply as possible, not as defensively as possible. So if they want even printf to show pseudo-denormals as finite numbers, because it's cheaper, they will not want isnan or isfinite to handle these specially either. > also, is there a glibc bug report about this? There was [3] but it has disappeared now. Bruno [1] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2007-06/msg00061.html [2] http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2007-06/msg00055.html [3] http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4586
