On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 12:56:31PM +0200, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
> > > > +static void test_qemu_strtod_erange_junk(void)
> > > > +{
> > > > +const char *str;
> > > > +const char *endptr;
> > > > +int err;
> > > > +double res;
> > > > +
> > > > +/* EINVAL has priority over ERANGE
On 19.05.23 19:52, Eric Blake wrote:
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 05:05:20PM +0200, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
On 12.05.23 04:10, Eric Blake wrote:
It's hard to tweak code for consistency if I can't prove what will or
won't break from those tweaks. Time to add unit tests for
qemu_strtod() and qemu_strto
On Fri, May 19, 2023 at 05:05:20PM +0200, Hanna Czenczek wrote:
> On 12.05.23 04:10, Eric Blake wrote:
> > It's hard to tweak code for consistency if I can't prove what will or
> > won't break from those tweaks. Time to add unit tests for
> > qemu_strtod() and qemu_strtod_finite().
> >
> > Among
On 12.05.23 04:10, Eric Blake wrote:
It's hard to tweak code for consistency if I can't prove what will or
won't break from those tweaks. Time to add unit tests for
qemu_strtod() and qemu_strtod_finite().
Among other things, I wrote a check whether we have C99 semantics for
strtod("0x1") (which
It's hard to tweak code for consistency if I can't prove what will or
won't break from those tweaks. Time to add unit tests for
qemu_strtod() and qemu_strtod_finite().
Among other things, I wrote a check whether we have C99 semantics for
strtod("0x1") (which MUST parse hex numbers) rather than C8
