Hi Brian, The reported benchmark results are impressive: http://bugs.sun.com/view_bug.do?bug_id=7032154
Where can we find the 7032154 patch to review it ? Dima On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:50 AM, Brian Burkhalter <brian.burkhal...@oracle.com> wrote: > Hi Dima, > > On Feb 25, 2013, at 1:14 AM, Dmitry Nadezhin wrote: > > I looked at your fix of sunbug=6358355 "Fix Float.parseFloat to round > correctly and preserve monotonicity". > […] > > 1) The line in floatValue() method > fValue = (float) doubleValue(); > > fValue can become Float.POSITIVE_INFINITY. > It causes incorrect result on input like this > […] > > It can be fixed in such a way > fValue = Math.max(Float.MIN_VALUE, Math.min(Float.MAX_VALUE, (float) > doubleValue())); > > > Thanks for the catch! > > 2) The line in floatValue() method. > // difference is exactly half an ULP > // round to some other value maybe, then finish > fValue += 0.5f*ulp( fValue, overvalue ); > > When fValue is subnormal, the right-hand sign evaluates to 0, fValue > remains unchanged. > This is similar to the bug 4396272 - Parsing doubles fails to follow > IEEE for largest decimal that should yield 0. > […] > > > It can be fixed in such a way > fValue = (float) (fValue + 0.5*ulp(fValue, overvalue)); > Constant 0.5 instead of 0.5f causes double evaluation of right-hand > side, so it doesn'nt underflow. > > > I was intending to comment on this as well. > > Once approved, I was thinking that the patch for 7192954 "Fix > Float.parseFloat to round correctly and preserve monotonicity" should be > applied first followed by patches for 4396272 "Parsing doubles fails to > follow IEEE for largest decimal that should yield 0" and > "BigInteger.doubleValue() is depressingly slow." I initiated some of these > reviews out of this sequence as I had not become aware of all the linkages. > > I am actually also wondering whether the patch for 7032154 "Performance > tuning of sun.misc.FloatingDecimal/FormattedFloatingDecimal," which I just > learned of today, should perhaps be dealt with prior to any of the above? > > Thanks, > > Brian
