This is the mail archive of the gdb-patches@sourceware.org mailing list for the GDB project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [patch] Fix new FAIL `reject p 0x1.1' [fixup] [Re: [patch] Handle 0 result from sscanf when parsing fp values.]


On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 4:58 AM, Joseph S. Myers
<joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>
>> [fixup]
>>
>> On Fri, 20 Aug 2010 09:34:30 +0200, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> 0x1.1 is a perfectly valid hexadecimal floating point. ?The new testcase:
>
> It's not valid in C source code (a binary exponent is required), though it
> is valid as input to strtod (like INF, NAN, NAN(n-char-sequence_opt) etc.)
> - is the intention here that GDB deliberately accepts something beyond
> what would be valid in C source code?

I don't know what gdb is intended to accept.

My main concern here is that there is a testcase that exercises the
code in question.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]