No, I missed your message since I am not on the mailing list itself. Thanks!

Whelp, you apparently found a bug introduced into gdtoa itself, since the
same test program run on linux against their current code also fails with
the same incorrect byte ordering of the output:

gdtoa$ ./a.out

got: 1.06074e-314

bits: 000000007ff80000

I am not exactly sure of the intent here (since gdtoa doesn't use any sort
of version control), so I have mostly just removed that line of the change.
I will send a message to the gdoa developer also, informing him of your
finding

My test code is attached as a github comment on the same commit attached as
a patch here.
https://github.com/vtjnash/mingw-w64/commit/561c763593981f7516ab57b0cae974ebdcef4de3#commitcomment-112904299

On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 8:55 AM Jameson Nash <vtjn...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is it okay to bump this again?
>
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:57 AM Jameson Nash <vtjn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Alright, let's try that again!
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 8, 2023 at 11:54 AM Alvin Wong <al...@alvinhc.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, it seems the mailing list software stripped your attached patch.
>>> Please try resending it with a .txt file extension. (I suspect that
>>> Gmail doesn't send the .patch files with the MIME type `text/plain`.)
>>>
>>> On 7/1/2023 11:10, Jameson Nash wrote:
>>> > I noticed that gdtoa upstream appeared to have some changes that were
>>> not
>>> > reflected here, so I tried to copy them into mingw-w64 here. I had to
>>> > partly guess at what the diff was between the old and current versions
>>> > because upstream does not seem to provide version control, so this is
>>> a bit
>>> > hard to illustrate. For future reference, this is the content from
>>> today:
>>> >
>>> https://github.com/vtjnash/gdtoa/commit/a37a5e1354210f135003cc734cb097eee48e58b5
>>> ,
>>> > which is also included as a tgz in the commit here for future
>>> reference. I
>>> > did not import any of the new features (new files) since those are not
>>> > specified as part of C9x or POSIX, so they did not seem necessary.
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Mingw-w64-public mailing list
>>> > Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
>>>
>>

_______________________________________________
Mingw-w64-public mailing list
Mingw-w64-public@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public

Reply via email to