From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on yquem.inria.fr X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,DNS_FROM_SECURITYSAGE, SPF_FAIL autolearn=disabled version=3.1.3 X-Original-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Delivered-To: caml-list@yquem.inria.fr Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by yquem.inria.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4DADABBAF for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:26:54 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvgCAB/yIElQRFuwgWdsb2JhbACTVgEBFiK5boJ5 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,618,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="19251502" Received: from discorde.inria.fr ([192.93.2.38]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP; 17 Nov 2008 13:26:54 +0100 Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by discorde.inria.fr (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id mAHCQrAB009726 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:26:53 +0100 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvgCAB/yIElQRFuwgWdsb2JhbACTVgEBFiK5boJ5 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.33,618,1220220000"; d="scan'208";a="19251501" Received: from furbychan.cocan.org ([80.68.91.176]) by mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA; 17 Nov 2008 13:26:53 +0100 Received: from rich by furbychan.cocan.org with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1L23Bs-000670-Ok for caml-list@inria.fr; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:26:52 +0000 Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 12:26:52 +0000 To: caml-list@inria.fr Subject: Re: Another example (was: Re: [Caml-list] Is it a bug or just ordinary floating point differences?) Message-ID: <20081117122652.GC21299@annexia.org> References: <20081117102310.GA21299@annexia.org> <20081117122331.GB21299@annexia.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081117122331.GB21299@annexia.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) From: Richard Jones X-Miltered: at discorde with ID 4921630D.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail . ensmp . fr)! X-Spam: no; 0.00; bug:01 rounding:01 binutils:01 mingw:01 wine:98 constants:01 wrote:01 compilers:01 caml-list:01 data:02 binary:02 assembler:02 converting:05 initialize:05 somewhere:06 On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 12:23:31PM +0000, Richard Jones wrote: > I'm thinking the difference must be somewhere in Wine itself or in the > way that the two compilers initialize the floating point environment, > such as using different rounding modes. > L103: .double 62.05 > .data > L102: .double 60. Or another difference could be the way the assembler is converting these constants into binary. The cross-compiler uses gas from binutils 2.18.50 (MinGW 20080109 patch). Rich. -- Richard Jones Red Hat