From:	Morten Welinder <terra AT diku DOT dk>
Date:	Mon, 2 Jan 1995 10:06:02 +0100
To:	IBBT0 AT cc DOT uab DOT es
Cc:	djgpp AT sun DOT soe DOT clarkson DOT edu
Subject:	Re: Why this bug?

(Please check your mail software -- it inserts all kinds of
funny codes, that makes your text hard to read.)

   I have a paradox I cannot understand. I have compiled a program under
   GCC and under Borland TC (v. 2.0) and TC++ (v. 3.1) for Windows,
   and both versions give results quite different, being the GCC version
   the correct one. I include a simple code that represent the simplifie=
   d
   core of the problem: a double obtained from a product and stored subt=
   racted
   =66rom the same product does not give 0 as result. It seems an error =
   of
   Borland compilers but I feel it to serious to be true; I'd like to kn=
   ow
   if it is a real bug or if it has some justification (although the res=
   ult
   is erroneus) and if there is some way to skip the error without affec=
   ting
   the code performace.

This is a feature, not a bug :-)

Seriously, compilers are allowed to work with higher precision
for temporary results than for values stored in `double'
variables.  The compiler just differ in their oppinion of
`temporary'.

Morten
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
For information on the free Republic of Macedonia connect to the WWW link
http://ASUdesign.eas.asu.edu/places/Macedonia/republic/
-------------------------------------------Morten Welinder, terra AT diku DOT dk

- Raw text -