Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!mailrus!ames!sgi!msc
From: msc@ramoth.SGI.COM (Mark Callow)
Newsgroups: comp.windows.news
Subject: Re: NeWS on a SUN, bug in translate?
Message-ID: <12182@sgi.SGI.COM>
Date: 4 Mar 88 19:29:24 GMT
References: <539@modular.UUCP> <2090@natmlab.dms.oz> <1369@vaxb.calgary.UUCP> <1419@vaxb.calgary.UUCP>
Sender: daemon@sgi.SGI.COM
Distribution: comp
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc, Mountain View, CA
Lines: 27
Keywords: NeWS

In article <1419@vaxb.calgary.UUCP>, radford@calgary.UUCP (Radford Neal) writes:
> Now, I understand that the people working on NeWS are under pressure to
> get the product out the door. There's obviously a tradeoff between 
> quality and release date. I just don't think leaving the overflow checks out
> of fract.c is a good tradeoff.
> 
>    Radford Neal

How you got the impression I was advocating leaving out the overflow checks
I don't know. I was warning you that fixing fract.c isn't sufficient
to cure the overflow problems.  Many places that should call vfrmul,
and then check the overflow flag, don't.  The checks are important.
In fact I've just been talking to Sun about some of the places that
don't check.

Incidentally, when I saw that vfrmul in fract.c simply called frmul
I realised immediately that no overflow checking was happening.
Possibly I had an advantage in that I had first dealt with a 68020
port using the fract.s routines.  I knew the distinction between
frmul and vfrmul and about fract_overflows.


--
From the TARDIS of Mark Callow
msc@sgi.sgi.com, ...{ames,decwrl,sun}!sgi!msc
"There is much virtue in a window.  It is to a human being as a frame is to
a painting, as a proscenium to a play.  It strongly defines its content."