Article View: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Article #4542Re: Microsoft C actually does something better!
From: Duncan Murdoch
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 1991 00:17
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 1991 00:17
17 lines
1351 bytes
1351 bytes
In article <1991Feb5.184015.9539@demott.com> kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes: >> >>MSC may be correct for C, but TP prints 1.00000000E+0400, which is even more >>correct. (This is because TP promotes expressions to the 10 byte extended >>type.) When I forced the result to go into a double, I got an overflow >>error; when I masked those, I got INF. > > It's more correct mathematically, but not according to the C language >spec. There *are* (non-standard) ways in MSC to use the 10-byte reals. Sure, I understand that. Just curious though: does the C standard address the problem of what to do when an expression overflows? That seems like such a machine dependent thing that I'd think it would be left up to the implementation, but you never know. Duncan Murdoch dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1991Feb6.001724.23430@maytag.waterloo.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watstat.waterloo.edu!dmurdochReferences:
<8904@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> <1991Feb5.020455.26710@maytag.waterloo.edu> <1991Feb5.184015.9539@demott.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watstat.waterloo.edu!dmurdoch From: dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu (Duncan Murdoch) Subject: Re: Microsoft C actually does something better! Message-ID: <1991Feb6.001724.23430@maytag.waterloo.edu> Sender: daemon@maytag.waterloo.edu (Admin) Organization: University of Waterloo References: <8904@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> <1991Feb5.020455.26710@maytag.waterloo.edu> <1991Feb5.184015.9539@demott.com> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 91 00:17:24 GMT Lines: 17