Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!agate!shelby!rutgers!cbmvax!ken
From: ken@cbmvax.commodore.com (Ken Farinsky - CATS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Lattice C double
Message-ID: <14905@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 5 Oct 90 14:02:58 GMT
References: <1990Sep28.063045.2599@ericsson.se> <14795@cbmvax.commodore.com> <1990Oct4.063507.1899@ericsson.se>
Reply-To: ken@cbmvax.commodore.com (Ken Farinsky - CATS)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 32

In article <1990Oct4.063507.1899@ericsson.se> etxpnil@etxsj23.ericsson.se writes:
>In article <14795@cbmvax.commodore.com> ken@cbmvax.commodore.com writes:
>>In article <1990Sep28.063045.2599@ericsson.se> etxpnil@etxsj23.ericsson.se writes:
>>>main()
>>>{
>>>    double dub;
>>>    dub = 12345678.0;
>>>    dub = dub * 10.0;
>>>    printf("%.9g\n",dub);
>>>}
>>>When compiled with the Lattice C V5.04, I've got the following output:
>>>123456779.999999999
>>
>>Are you using the correct compiler flags and linker options...
>
>I've now tried it...with the same result...

Ok, how about:

    printf("%.9lg\n",dub);  /* value is a long float (double) */

Nope, that doesn't do it.  Looks like the problem is that you are
displaying more than 15 digits, which is beyond the accuracy of
the numeric format that you are using.  If you use a smaller
number (1234.0), then you get the result that you expect.  Are the
other machines that you are using this on using a different
numeric format?
-- 
--
Ken Farinsky - CATS - (215) 431-9421 - Commodore Business Machines
uucp: ken@cbmvax.commodore.com   or  ...{uunet,rutgers}!cbmvax!ken
bix:  kfarinsky