Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!ogicse!orstcs!thyphy.physics.orst.edu!ghe
From: ghe@physics.orst.edu (Guangliang He)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.aix
Subject: Re: drand48()
Keywords: BUG, work as designed
Message-ID: <1991May08.234014.6370@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Date: 8 May 91 23:40:14 GMT
References: <1991May08.214654.26143@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>
Sender: @lynx.CS.ORST.EDU
Reply-To: ghe@physics.orst.edu
Organization: Dept. of Physics, Oregon State University
Lines: 35
Nntp-Posting-Host: thyphy.physics.orst.edu

In article <1991May08.214654.26143@lynx.CS.ORST.EDU>, ghe@physics.orst.edu (Guangliang He) writes:
|> Can anyone tell me what kind result I should expect from the following little
|> C program?
|> -----
|> #include <stdio.h>
|> 
|> main()
|> {
|>     int i;
|> 
|>     for (i = 0; i < 10; i++)
|>         printf("%e\n", drand48());
|> }
|> -----
|> 
|> 
|> What is the problem on RS/6000? Is it a BUG in drand48() or is it 'work
|> as designed'??? :-( :-(
|> 
|> ---
|>   Guangliang He                |  -----Go Blazers!-----
|>   ghe@physics.orst.edu         |  -----Go Blazers!-----            
|> 

-- 

As Marc (jackk@shasta.Stanford.EDU) pointed in a Email message, declearing
double drand48() fix the problem on AIX. Sorry for the confusion, folks.

But I'm still wondering why the program worked on SUN without declearing
double drand48(), What is the difference between two compilers?

---
  Guangliang He                |  -----Go Blazers!-----
  ghe@physics.orst.edu         |  -----Go Blazers!-----