#622 FIX() for negative inputs and unsigned types

[Orion Poplawski]

test_fix.pro checks for the results of FIX() for negative inputs and unsigned returned types. The IDL docs (http://www.exelisvis.com/docs/FIX.html) don't reference this situation explicitly, but it seems like an inherently undefined operation and as such architecture/implementation specific. And while gdl appears to match IDL on x86_64, e.g.:

GDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
   65535
IDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
   65535

on arm this is returning:

GDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
   0

I have no access to IDL on non-x86 architectures so I can't compare. But my suggestion would be to not test this situation.

[Orion Poplawski]

Ping? I think we should not test this condition.

[giloo]

Pong? :-)
I agree with you, we should do something.
The test comments by Alain specifically refer to problems with negative inputs reported by a "Nicolas". Everybody could remove the test for negative values, but I would prefer Alain reviews this. Perhaps we should make the test only for intel
architectures, or simply report the errors but let the test pass.
Gilles

On 05/19/2015 05:06 AM, Orion Poplawski wrote:

Ping? I think we should not test this condition.

---

[bugs:#622] http://sourceforge.net/p/gnudatalanguage/bugs/622 FIX() for negative inputs and unsigned types

Status: open
Group: v1.0 (example)
Created: Mon Sep 08, 2014 08:53 PM UTC by Orion Poplawski
Last Updated: Mon Sep 08, 2014 08:53 PM UTC
Owner: nobody

test_fix.pro checks for the results of FIX() for negative inputs and unsigned returned types. The IDL docs (http://www.exelisvis.com/docs/FIX.html) don't reference this situation explicitly, but it seems like an inherently undefined operation and as such
architecture/implementation specific. And while gdl appears to match IDL on x86_64, e.g.:

GDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
65535
IDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
65535

on arm this is returning:

GDL> print,FIX(-1.01,type=12)
0

I have no access to IDL on non-x86 architectures so I can't compare. But my suggestion would be to not test this situation.

---

Sent from sourceforge.net because you indicated interest in https://sourceforge.net/p/gnudatalanguage/bugs/622/ https://sourceforge.net/p/gnudatalanguage/bugs/622

To unsubscribe from further messages, please visit https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions/ https://sourceforge.net/auth/subscriptions

[Sylwester Arabas]

moved to github: https://github.com/gnudatalanguage/gdl/issues/175