Re: string.c:string_to_num

2004-07-12 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 09:29:23AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Nicholas Clark wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 09:20:31AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > > > > > 1) I've serious troubles with the precision of string_to_nu

Re: string.c:string_to_num

2004-07-12 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Nicholas Clark wrote: > On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 09:20:31AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > > > 1) I've serious troubles with the precision of string_to_num. The test > > > bewow fails, 1.e100 isn't really 10**100. > > > 2) I've

Re: string.c:string_to_num

2004-07-12 Thread Nicholas Clark
On Mon, Jul 12, 2004 at 09:20:31AM -0400, Dan Sugalski wrote: > On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > > > 1) I've serious troubles with the precision of string_to_num. The test > > bewow fails, 1.e100 isn't really 10**100. > > 2) I've modified string_to_num to just use atof() which works.

Re: string.c:string_to_num

2004-07-12 Thread Dan Sugalski
On Mon, 12 Jul 2004, Leopold Toetsch wrote: > 1) I've serious troubles with the precision of string_to_num. The test > bewow fails, 1.e100 isn't really 10**100. > 2) I've modified string_to_num to just use atof() which works. I so wish this were the case. Unfortunately it's not. atof's behaviour