thr3ads.net - llvm dev - [llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class? [Aug 2015]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Dan Liew via llvm-dev

2015-Aug-10 18:05 UTC

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

Hi,

I've been playing around with the APFloat class lately and I came
across behavior I was not expecting based on reading the
implementation comments and I'm wondering if it's a bug or
intentional.

The behavior concerns converting an APFloat to a string and back
again. In the implementation of ``APFloat::toString(...)`` you can
specify ``FormatPrecision`` as 0. The method comments state that this
will use the "natural precision" of the number. In the actual
implementation the comments say that when FormatPrecision is 0 that

```
// We use enough digits so the number can be round-tripped back to an
// APFloat. The formula comes from "How to Print Floating-Point Numbers
// Accurately" by Steele and White.
```

Based on the above comments I expected to be able to convert an
APFloat to a string and back again when ``FormatPrecision`` is set to
zero. However this does not seem to hold. Here's some example code
that demonstrates this.

```
#include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h"
#include "llvm/ADT/APFloat.h"
#include <string>

using namespace llvm;

std::string getString(APFloat f) {
  SmallVector<char,10> strRep;
  // FormatPrecision=0 means that the "natural precision" of the
number is used
  f.toString(strRep,/*FormatPrecision=*/0, /*FormatMaxPadding=*/0);
  return std::string(strRep.begin(), strRep.end());
}

uint16_t getBits(APFloat f) {
  APInt bits = f.bitcastToAPInt();
  assert(bits.getActiveBits() <= 16);
  return (uint16_t) (bits.getZExtValue() & 0xffff);
}

int main(int argc, char** argv) {
  APFloat f(APFloat::IEEEhalf);
  APFloat newF(APFloat::IEEEhalf);
  f.convertFromString("0.3", APFloat::rmTowardZero);
  outs() << "f bits: 0x";
  outs().write_hex(getBits(f));
  outs() << "\n";
  assert(getBits(f) == 0x34cc);
  // Check that if we get the string using FormatPrecision=0
  // that this can be used to construct another APFloat of the
  // same value.
  std::string fAsString = getString(f);
  outs() << "f as string: \"" << fAsString <<
"\"\n";
  newF.convertFromString(fAsString, APFloat::rmTowardZero);
  outs() << "newF as string: \"" << getString(newF)
<< "\"\n";
  outs() << "newF bits: 0x";
  outs().write_hex(getBits(newF));
  outs() << "\n";
  // BUG?: This assert fails
  assert(getBits(newF) == 0x34cc);
  return 0;
}
```

The output I see is

```
f bits: 0x34cc
f as string: "2.998E-1"
newF as string: "2.9956E-1"
newF bits: 0x34cb
... Assertion `getBits(newF) == 0x34cc' failed.
```

As you can see when we create a new APFloat from the string we get a
slightly smaller number. I have observed that if I use
``APFloat::rmNearestTiesToEven`` when creating ``newF`` that I do get
an APFloat instance which has the same value as the original APFloat.
So I'm wondering if the comment about round tripping APFloats only
holds for certain rounding modes.

Any thoughts on this?

Thanks,
Dan

Hal Finkel via llvm-dev

2015-Aug-16 03:19 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

----- Original Message -----> From: "Dan Liew via llvm-dev" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> To: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Sent: Monday, August 10, 2015 1:05:59 PM
> Subject: [llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I've been playing around with the APFloat class lately and I came
> across behavior I was not expecting based on reading the
> implementation comments and I'm wondering if it's a bug or
> intentional.
> 
> The behavior concerns converting an APFloat to a string and back
> again. In the implementation of ``APFloat::toString(...)`` you can
> specify ``FormatPrecision`` as 0. The method comments state that this
> will use the "natural precision" of the number. In the actual
> implementation the comments say that when FormatPrecision is 0 that
> 
> ```
> // We use enough digits so the number can be round-tripped back to an
> // APFloat. The formula comes from "How to Print Floating-Point
> Numbers
> // Accurately" by Steele and White.
> ```
> 
> Based on the above comments I expected to be able to convert an
> APFloat to a string and back again when ``FormatPrecision`` is set to
> zero. However this does not seem to hold. Here's some example code
> that demonstrates this.
> 
> ```
> #include "llvm/Support/raw_ostream.h"
> #include "llvm/ADT/APFloat.h"
> #include <string>
> 
> using namespace llvm;
> 
> std::string getString(APFloat f) {
>   SmallVector<char,10> strRep;
>   // FormatPrecision=0 means that the "natural precision" of the
>   number is used
>   f.toString(strRep,/*FormatPrecision=*/0, /*FormatMaxPadding=*/0);
>   return std::string(strRep.begin(), strRep.end());
> }
> 
> uint16_t getBits(APFloat f) {
>   APInt bits = f.bitcastToAPInt();
>   assert(bits.getActiveBits() <= 16);
>   return (uint16_t) (bits.getZExtValue() & 0xffff);
> }
> 
> int main(int argc, char** argv) {
>   APFloat f(APFloat::IEEEhalf);
>   APFloat newF(APFloat::IEEEhalf);
>   f.convertFromString("0.3", APFloat::rmTowardZero);
>   outs() << "f bits: 0x";
>   outs().write_hex(getBits(f));
>   outs() << "\n";
>   assert(getBits(f) == 0x34cc);
>   // Check that if we get the string using FormatPrecision=0
>   // that this can be used to construct another APFloat of the
>   // same value.
>   std::string fAsString = getString(f);
>   outs() << "f as string: \"" << fAsString
<< "\"\n";
>   newF.convertFromString(fAsString, APFloat::rmTowardZero);
>   outs() << "newF as string: \"" <<
getString(newF) << "\"\n";
>   outs() << "newF bits: 0x";
>   outs().write_hex(getBits(newF));
>   outs() << "\n";
>   // BUG?: This assert fails
>   assert(getBits(newF) == 0x34cc);
>   return 0;
> }
> ```
> 
> The output I see is
> 
> ```
> f bits: 0x34cc
> f as string: "2.998E-1"
> newF as string: "2.9956E-1"
> newF bits: 0x34cb
> ... Assertion `getBits(newF) == 0x34cc' failed.
> ```
> 
> As you can see when we create a new APFloat from the string we get a
> slightly smaller number. I have observed that if I use
> ``APFloat::rmNearestTiesToEven`` when creating ``newF`` that I do get
> an APFloat instance which has the same value as the original APFloat.
> So I'm wondering if the comment about round tripping APFloats only
> holds for certain rounding modes.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?
It is certainly possible that APFloat::rmNearestTiesToEven is required for the
current code to work (that's the default mode that most of LLVM assumes).
That certainly seems like a bug, and I'm not surprised if you find bugs when
using other rounding modes.

 -Hal
> 
> Thanks,
> Dan
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> 
-- 
Hal Finkel
Assistant Computational Scientist
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory

Dan Liew via llvm-dev

2015-Aug-21 18:10 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

>> Any thoughts on this?
>
> It is certainly possible that APFloat::rmNearestTiesToEven is required for
the current code to work (that's the default mode that most of LLVM
assumes). That certainly seems like a bug, and I'm not surprised if you find
bugs when using other rounding modes.
Thanks for the reply. I don't really have time to look into the
details of this but I've opened up a bug report in case someone does
want to take a look at it in the future.

https://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=24539

llvm dev - Aug 2015 - Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?

[llvm-dev] Bug or expected behavior of APFloat class?