From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gdb-patches-return-52856-listarch-gdb-patches=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 25238 invoked by alias); 21 Dec 2007 16:19:30 -0000
Received: (qmail 25229 invoked by uid 22791); 21 Dec 2007 16:19:29 -0000
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from ns2.suse.de (HELO mx2.suse.de) (195.135.220.15)     by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:19:23 +0000
Received: from Relay2.suse.de (relay-ext.suse.de [195.135.221.8]) 	(using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) 	(No client certificate requested) 	by mx2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6D302E624; 	Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:19:20 +0100 (CET)
From: Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>, 	gdb-patches@sourceware.org
Subject: Re: [patch 2/2] Wrap-up expression support for DFP.
References: <20071220054926.148275471@br.ibm.com> 	<20071220055107.194393592@br.ibm.com> <uzlw4hw5f.fsf@gnu.org>
X-Yow: Go on, EMOTE!  I was RAISED on thought balloons!!
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 16:30:00 -0000
In-Reply-To: <uzlw4hw5f.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri\, 21 Dec 	2007 18\:04\:12 +0200")
Message-ID: <jer6hgnhq2.fsf@sykes.suse.de>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-IsSubscribed: yes
Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gdb-patches.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gdb-patches-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/gdb-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org
X-SW-Source: 2007-12/txt/msg00378.txt.bz2

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 03:49:28 -0200
>> From: Thiago Jung Bauermann <bauerman@br.ibm.com>
>> 
>> +  sprintf (buffer, "%Lf", value_as_double (from));
>
> If we must live with going through the printed representation, at the
> very least please use "%.30Lf", so as not to lose precision due to the
> default number of significant digits produced under "%Lf", arbitrarily
> chosen by the libc implementation.

Shouldn't that be better "%.30Lg"?

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de
SuSE Linux Products GmbH, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
PGP key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."