search for: 0x1p

Displaying 6 results from an estimated 6 matches for "0x1p".

Did you mean: 0x1
2008 Mar 05
2
[LLVMdev] Error messages in llvm-test
..., 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0 }; /* for PHI node */ 208 llvm_cbe_z_tmp_0 = llvm_cbe_z_tmp_0__PHI_TEMPORARY; 209 llvm_cbe_y_tmp_0 = llvm_cbe_y_tmp_0__PHI_TEMPORARY; 210 llvm_cbe_x_tmp_0 = llvm_cbe_x_tmp_0__PHI_TEMPORARY; 211 llvm_cbe_tmp19 = (((llvm_cbe_x_tmp_0 + { 0x1p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0 }) + { 0x0p+0, 0x1p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0 }) + { 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x1p+0, 0x0p+0 }) + { 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0, 0x1p+0 }; 212 llvm_cbe_tmp37 = (((((llvm_cbe_y_tmp_0 + { 0x1p+0, 0x1p+1, 0x0p+0, 0x0p+0 })...
2011 Nov 02
0
[LLVMdev] Issues in compiler-rt __truncdfsf2 and __extendsfdf2 functions?
Hi all, We are using compiler-rt for floating point emulation on our DSP core. I am currently investigating two issues found by running TestFloat [1] on our core. The first issue is in __truncdfsf2. __truncdfsf2(0x1p+128) produces 0x1p-128, while the expected result is inf. __truncdfsf2(-0x1p+128) produces -0x1p-128, while the expected result is -inf. I think the condition of the else if on line 137 of truncdfsf2.c should be (aAbs >= overflow) instead of the current (aAbs > overflow) because overflow is 0...
2016 Dec 20
2
Very small numbers in hexadecimal notation parsed as zero
Hi all, I have noticed incorrect parsing of very small hexadecimal numbers like "0x1.00000000d0000p-987". Such a hexadecimal representation can can be produced by sprintf() using the %a flag. The return value is incorrectly reported as 0 when coercing these numbers to double using as.double()/as.numeric(), as illustrated in the three examples below:
2016 Dec 21
0
Very small numbers in hexadecimal notation parsed as zero
...ect parsing: > as.double("0x1.00000000dp-987") # 7.645296e-298, as expected > as.double("0x1.p-1022") # 2.225074e-308, as expected Yes, this looks like a bug, indeed. Similarly convincing is a simple comparison (of even less extreme) > as.double("0x1p-987") [1] 7.645296e-298 > as.double("0x1.0000000000p-987") [1] 0 > The "bug boundary" seems around here: > as.double("0x1.000000000000000000000000p-928") # fails [1] 0 > as.double("0x1p-928") [1] 4.407213e-280 > > as.double("0...
2011 Mar 09
2
Anomaly with unique and match
I stumbled onto this working on an update to coxph. The last 6 lines below are the question, the rest create a test data set. tmt585% R R version 2.12.2 (2011-02-25) Copyright (C) 2011 The R Foundation for Statistical Computing ISBN 3-900051-07-0 Platform: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu (64-bit) # Lines of code from survival/tests/singtest.R > library(survival) Loading required package: splines
2016 Mar 02
2
Incorrect return values for APFloat::convertFromString?
...ethod. 1. If I pass the hex representation of the closest value to 0.1 (0x19999Ap-24), everything is fine and opOk is returned. However, if I pass the same value as a decimal string (0.10000002384185791015625), opInexact is set. 2. On the lower end of the scale, the smallest denormal 0x1p-149 returns opOk, but the slightly larger value 0x1.8p-149 has opUnderflow set and (as expected) opInexact. Is this behavior correct? -- Johannes S. Mueller-Roemer, MSc Wiss. Mitarbeiter - Interactive Engineering Technologies (IET) Fraunhofer-Institut für Graphische Datenverarbeitung IGD Fraunho...