Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

I’ve only tested it in Delphi, so you’ll have to convert it to the right syntax for fpc, but either of these should do: function Frac1(const X: Double): Double; asm .align 16 .noframe movq rdx, xmm0 shl rdx, 32 and edx, $7FF0 cmp edx, $4330

Re: [fpc-devel] Case of string

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:05 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel wrote: > Nope, fixed in r38860. :) That's quick. Thanks. Bart ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org

Re: [fpc-devel] Case of string

Am 27.04.2018 um 22:48 schrieb Bart: On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel wrote: It's a bug due to refactoring. I'll commit the fix once I got to run the testsuite. So, I need not file a bugreport then? Nope, fixed in r38860. :)

Re: [fpc-devel] Case of string

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Sven Barth via fpc-devel wrote: > It's a bug due to refactoring. I'll commit the fix once I got to run the > testsuite. So, I need not file a bugreport then? Bart ___ fpc-devel maillist

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Yeah, I realized that myself and made a post about that a few minutes ago which seems to have crossed ways with yours... I was just projecting my annoyance about the lack of precision when being forced to do math in double instead of extended... > -Original Message- > From: fpc-devel

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Actually, that test is wrong, because the 32bit code will use Extended float literals instead of Double. If you force it to use double in 32bit you get the same result. If you want to use SSE instructions, you will need to add additional checks to see if the value will fit into an integer

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 02:48:14 +1000 "Thorsten Engler" wrote: > For what it’s worth, Delphi simply decided to give up on doing it correctly > and silently fail if the double is too large to fit in an Int64. >[...] > WriteLn(Frac(1e15+0.5)); > > WriteLn(Frac(1e16+0.5)); >

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Thorsten Engler schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 18:48: > For what it’s worth, Delphi simply decided to give up on doing it > correctly and silently fail if the double is too large to fit in an Int64. > > > > WriteLn(Frac(1e15+0.5)); > > WriteLn(Frac(1e16+0.5)); > > > >

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

For what it’s worth, Delphi simply decided to give up on doing it correctly and silently fail if the double is too large to fit in an Int64. WriteLn(Frac(1e15+0.5)); WriteLn(Frac(1e16+0.5)); When executed in 32bit code, returns: 5.00E-0001 5.00E-0001 And

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Thorsten Engler schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 17:47: > > That's true for i386. But on x86_64 cvt(t)sd2si instuctions can > > deal with int64 range, if destination register is a 64-bit one. > > You are still going to be at least 960-bit short... > I've disabled the SSE

Re: [fpc-devel] Case of string

Bart schrieb am Do., 26. Apr. 2018, 19:29: > Is this a bug, or was it changed by design? > It's a bug due to refactoring. I'll commit the fix once I got to run the testsuite. Regards, Sven > ___ fpc-devel maillist -

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> That's true for i386. But on x86_64 cvt(t)sd2si instuctions can > deal with int64 range, if destination register is a 64-bit one. You are still going to be at least 960-bit short... ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On Sat, 28 Apr 2018 00:09:12 +1000 "Thorsten Engler" wrote: > Highest integer that fits in a Int64: > 9223372036854775808 > 1e20: > 1 > > Your Int is overflowing. > > You can’t implement Frac by going through an Integer, that will never work. It

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

27.04.2018 17:14, Sven Barth via fpc-devel wrote: Thorsten Engler > schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 16:09: Highest integer that fits in a Int64: 9223372036854775808 1e20: 1 __ __

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Thorsten Engler schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 16:09: > Highest integer that fits in a Int64: > > 9223372036854775808 > > 1e20: > > 1 > > > > Your Int is overflowing. > > > > You can’t implement Frac by going through an Integer, that will never >

Re: [fpc-devel] *** GMX Spamverdacht *** Re: Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Highest integer that fits in a Int64: 9223372036854775808 1e20: 1 Your Int is overflowing. You can’t implement Frac by going through an Integer, that will never work. Except if you have an integer that can hold 1.8E308 (which would be a 1024 bit integer, or

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

Bart schrieb am Fr., 27. Apr. 2018, 13:42: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:04 AM, wrote: > > > If you compile and run this 64-bit program on Win 64 you get a crash > > And AFAICS your analysis of the cause (see bugtracker) is correct as well. > >

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:04 AM, wrote: > If you compile and run this 64-bit program on Win 64 you get a crash And AFAICS your analysis of the cause (see bugtracker) is correct as well. function fpc_frac_real(d: ValReal) : ValReal;compilerproc; assembler;

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 11:04 AM, wrote: > If you compile and run this 64-bit program on Win 64 you get a crash Confirmed on Win64 with r37885 . Bart ___ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> Note that "reporter" means that somebody's not a manager of the bug > tracker. The designation covers a lot of people who are regular > contributors to- and testers of- the core FPC code, and it's > probably unfair for somebody to accuse one of them of trolling > without considering that.

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On 27/04/18 06:45, Thorsten Engler wrote: But the only responses are by a reporter named Thaddy de Koning,> which are for me totally useless and IMO he did miss the point.It's not the first time the person has been less than helpful... After looking through other issues he has commented on, I

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

On 25.04.2018 11:04, i...@wolfgang-ehrhardt.de wrote: But the only responses are by a reporter named Thaddy de Koning, which are for me totally useless and IMO he did miss the point. Welcome to the FPC bug tracker! ;) Ondrej ___ fpc-devel maillist

Re: [fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

> But the only responses are by a reporter named Thaddy de Koning, > which are for me totally useless and IMO he did miss the point. It's not the first time the person has been less than helpful... After looking through other issues he has commented on, I don't think he has contributed anything

[fpc-devel] Broken frac function in FPC3.1.1 / Windows x86_64

If you compile and run this 64-bit program on Win 64 you get a crash program tfrac; var x,y: double; begin x := 1e20; writeln('x=',x); y := frac(x); writeln('frac(x)=',y); end. D:\Work\DAMath>D:\FPC311\bin\i386-win32\ppcrossx64.exe tfrac.pas Free Pascal Compiler version