Re: sprintf %f panics with NaN

On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:50:30AM +0000, H.Merijn Brand
wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 15:22:23 -0700, Zefram (via RT)

> > -	    if (c != 'e' && c != 'E') {
> > +	    if (c != 'e' && c != 'E' &&
nv == nv) {
> 
> From my C-knowledge point of view, I completely fail to
see the effect
> of this change. If I were the C-optimizer, I'd throw
away that part.

We'd better call you icc then. :-(

NaN != NaN
It's very strange.

Nicholas Clark

On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 09:53:08 +0100, Nicholas Clark
<nickccl4.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:50:30AM +0000, H.Merijn
Brand wrote:
> > On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 15:22:23 -0700, Zefram (via
RT)
> 
> > > -	    if (c != 'e' && c != 'E') {
> > > +	    if (c != 'e' && c != 'E'
&& nv == nv) {
> > 
> > From my C-knowledge point of view, I completely
fail to see the effect
> > of this change. If I were the C-optimizer, I'd
throw away that part.
> 
> We'd better call you icc then. :-(

tux will do

> NaN != NaN
> It's very strange.

/me realizes again that he is never too old to learn new
tricks
Thanks for the update

-- 
H.Merijn Brand         Amsterdam Perl Mongers (http://amsterdam.pm.org/
)
using & porting perl 5.6.2, 5.8.x, 5.9.x   on HP-UX
10.20, 11.00, 11.11,
& 11.23, SuSE 10.0 & 10.2, AIX 4.3 & 5.2, and
Cygwin. http://qa.perl.org
http://mirrors.de
velooper.com/hpux/            http://www.test-smoke.org
                        http
://www.goldmark.org/jeff/stupid-disclaimers/