[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: glibc segfault on "special" long double values is _ok_!?

From: Nix
Subject: Re: glibc segfault on "special" long double values is _ok_!?
Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:27:14 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) XEmacs/21.5-b27 (linux)

On 8 Jun 2007, Jeremy Linton verbalised:

> James Youngman wrote:
>> On 6/8/07, Nix <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> I'd say this behaviour violates the principle of least astonishment, at
>>> least. Mind you, avoiding it does seem like it could be expensive: [...]
>> Maybe.  For the issue-diagnostic-message use case, performance is not
>> such an issue.  But I'm sure there are valid use cases where ultimate
>> performance is really vital.  Use-cases vary a lot.
>       I sort of doubt that anyone who really cares about performance is 
> calling printf...

printf(), no. *s*printf(), maybe (although given how slow some printf()s
can be they're in for a shock on some platforms if they try).

`... in the sense that dragons logically follow evolution so they would
 be able to wield metal.' --- Kenneth Eng's colourless green ideas sleep

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]