CONFIRMCLOSE_j_ is not written out to the config file, so checking
the box in Edit|Configure|Session has no lasting effect.

Henry Rich

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Hui
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 5:23 PM
> To: Beta forum
> Subject: Re: [Jbeta] J32 Windows hbeta available
> 
> > Another reason for my dislike of NaN.
> 
> This was not what I actually said when I saw the source
> of the current problem.
> 
> The telephone company received a complaint that
> linemen working in the neighborhood were using
> foul language.  The district supervisor asked the
> linemen to explain, and received the following report:
> Joe and me were up on the pole when Joe dropped
> his wrench on my head.  I said to him, "Really,
> Joseph, you must handle your tools with more care."
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Roger Hui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Friday, February 1, 2008 13:30
> Subject: Re: [Jbeta] J32 Windows hbeta available
> To: Beta forum <[email protected]>
> 
> > The bug exposed by 2#_1e6 is one worth remembering for 
> > telling your grandchildren.
> > 
> >    2#_1e6  NB. wrong
> > _1000000 _475712
> > 
> > When moving sets of 8 bytes, there is a speed advantage 
> > in moving them as 64 bit floats, so in doing n#_1e6 it is
> > faster to move n%2 sets of 64 bits each set of which is
> > 2 repetitions of _1e6 :
> > 
> >    3!:3 ] _1e6
> > e1000000
> > 04000000
> > 01000000
> > 00000000
> > c0bdf0ff
> > 
> > But look what happens (in J602 gbeta or earlier):
> > 
> >    3!:3 ]2#_1e6
> > e1000000
> > 04000000
> > 02000000
> > 01000000
> > 02000000
> > c0bdf0ff
> > c0bdf8ff
> > 
> > The c0bdf0ff (_1e6) got changed to c0bdf8ff (_475712).
> > 
> >    3!:3 ]_.
> > e1000000
> > 08000000
> > 01000000
> > 00000000
> > 00000000
> > 0000f8ff
> > 
> > It turns out that if you have a 64-bit pattern that looks like NaN,
> > on some compilers (or different versions of the same compiler)
> > the generated code quietly changes a bit from 0 to 1.  Another
> > manifestation of the bug is as follows (in J602 gbeta or earlier):
> > 
> >    x=: 240 255{a.
> >    y=: 8$x
> >    y = 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 {x
> > 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1
> > 
> > We'd actually discovered this interesting "feature" at around 
> > 2000, 
> > but a recent compiler upgrade by one of us at Jsoftware exposed 
> > the problem anew.  The situation is that in C, when x and y 
> > are 
> > doubles and you execute the C statement
> >    x=y;
> > it is possible for x and y to be not bit-by-bit identical.  
> > 
> > Another reason for my dislike of NaN.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For information about J forums see 
> http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm

Reply via email to