Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.programmer
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!maytag!watstat.waterloo.edu!dmurdoch
From: dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu (Duncan Murdoch)
Subject: Re: Microsoft C actually does something better!
Message-ID: <1991Feb6.001724.23430@maytag.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@maytag.waterloo.edu (Admin)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <8904@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> <1991Feb5.020455.26710@maytag.waterloo.edu> <1991Feb5.184015.9539@demott.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 91 00:17:24 GMT
Lines: 17

In article <1991Feb5.184015.9539@demott.com> kdq@demott.com (Kevin D. Quitt) writes:
>>
>>MSC may be correct for C, but TP prints 1.00000000E+0400, which is even more
>>correct.  (This is because TP promotes expressions to the 10 byte extended 
>>type.)  When I forced the result to go into a double, I got an overflow 
>>error; when I masked those, I got INF.
>
>    It's more correct mathematically, but not according to the C language
>spec.  There *are* (non-standard) ways in MSC to use the 10-byte reals.

Sure, I understand that.  Just curious though:  does the C standard address
the problem of what to do when an expression overflows?  That seems like such
a machine dependent thing that I'd think it would be left up to the 
implementation, but you never know.

Duncan Murdoch
dmurdoch@watstat.waterloo.edu