Date: Mon, 13 Oct 1997 09:27:54 -0700 From: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@consys.com> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: "Russell L. Carter" <rcarter@consys.com>, gjohnson@nola.srrc.usda.gov, tlambert@primenet.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Floating point exceptions Message-ID: <199710131627.JAA03837@dnstoo.consys.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 11 Oct 1997 17:01:47 %2B0930." <199710110731.RAA00733@word.smith.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
}> |> FreeBSD (so I can replace Linux). My understanding is that FreeBSD traps }> |> FPE's. Is there a way for me to change the FreeBSD source code to mask FPE's }> |> rather than trap them? Better yet, can I do that for a specific application at }> |> compile time? Your assistance is greatly appreciated. }> | }> |Fix: Correct the code to not generate exceptions }> }> Hmm, I don't think so. There are a variety of reasons that NA people }> want to use those carefully thought out exceptions. Find }> 'em yerself. } }In the original case the NA people weren't using the exceptions; they }were ignoring them. } }IMHO FreeBSD does the correct thing; it notifies you of the exception. }It is your responsibility to decide what to do about it. I agree, as long as it is understood that some codes are correctly written to generate exceptions that are best masked. fpsetmask() appears to fit the bill. } }I have spent not a little time carefully explaining to various }scientific programmers about arithmetic exceptions and why they should }care about them, and so far have had a 100% conversion rate. If you }look a physicist in the eye and say "unquantifiable error", they will }usually listen. What do physicists know about NA? :-) :-) :-) Russell
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199710131627.JAA03837>