search for: fcnormal

This patch supplies software IEEE floating point support. The comment from the patch reproduced below says all there is to say. This patch contains the prior "cleanup" patch; please don't apply that one. Please let me know of any bugs. It is tested reasonably well, but until I put together random tests it's hard to have 100% confidence. Neil. /* A self-contained host- and

...ave something this basic crash me. It came up because the JITter will call ConstantFP::get with the GenericValue arguments passed it, but the above repro is a lot simpler and is independent of the JITter. My call stack looks like this: in here it fails this: assert(category == fcNormal || category == fcNaN); Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::significandParts() Line 360 + 0x39 bytes C++ Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::zeroSignificand() Line 387 + 0x15 bytes C++ Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::APFloat(const llvm::fltSemantics & ourSemantics=...

...ave something this basic crash me. It came up because the JITter will call ConstantFP::get with the GenericValue arguments passed it, but the above repro is a lot simpler and is independent of the JITter. My call stack looks like this: in here it fails this: assert(category == fcNormal || category == fcNaN); Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::significandParts() Line 360 + 0x39 bytes C++ Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::zeroSignificand() Line 387 + 0x15 bytes C++ I've been working in this area and probably introduced this, but I don't see how: ze...

...because the JITter will > call ConstantFP::get with the GenericValue arguments passed it, but > the above repro is a lot simpler and is independent of the JITter. > > > > My call stack looks like this: > > > > in here it fails this: assert(category == fcNormal || > category == fcNaN); > > Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::significandParts() Line > 360 + 0x39 bytes C++ > > Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::zeroSignificand() Line > 387 + 0x15 bytes C++ I've been working in this area and probably introdu...

...ave something this basic crash me. It came up because the JITter will call ConstantFP::get with the GenericValue arguments passed it, but the above repro is a lot simpler and is independent of the JITter. My call stack looks like this: in here it fails this: assert(category == fcNormal || category == fcNaN); Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::significandParts() Line 360 + 0x39 bytes C++ Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::zeroSignificand() Line 387 + 0x15 bytes C++ I've been working in this area and probably introduced this, but I don't see how: ze...

...because the JITter will > call ConstantFP::get with the GenericValue arguments passed it, but > the above repro is a lot simpler and is independent of the JITter. > > > > My call stack looks like this: > > > > in here it fails this: assert(category == fcNormal || > category == fcNaN); > > Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::significandParts() Line > 360 + 0x39 bytes C++ > > Fibonacci.exe!llvm::APFloat::zeroSignificand() Line > 387 + 0x15 bytes C++ > > I've been working in this area and probab...

...*/ + lostFraction = lostFractionThroughTruncation + (significandParts(), oldPartCount, newPartCount * integerPartWidth); + if (newPartCount == 1) + { + integerPart newPart = significandParts()[0]; + freeSignificand(); + significand.part = newPart; + } } if(category == fcNormal) { /* Re-interpret our bit-pattern. */ exponent += toSemantics.precision - semantics->precision; semantics = &toSemantics; - fs = normalize(rounding_mode, lfExactlyZero); + fs = normalize(rounding_mode, lostFraction); } else { semantics = &toSemantics;...