[illumos-Developer] Review for 166 CR6901979 error in xdr_float.c not fixed

[Garrett D'Amore]

  Please send me a new webrev.

I'd like the Reviewed by: lines in your hg export to reflect your actual 
reviewers, and a copy of your nightly build's mail_msg file.

     - Garrett

On 03/21/11 08:42 PM, Jason King wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2011 at 9:52 PM, Garrett D'Amore<garrett at damore.org>  wrote:
>> On Mon, 2011-03-21 at 20:34 -0500, Jason King wrote:
>>> Ok.. after a few unrelated issues with the sparc build, this tests out
>>> correctly (using data generated from s10 sparc) and also includes a
>>> few minor cstyle cleanups in the existing code:
>>>
>>> http://cr.illumos.org/view/x2ewa65v/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Developer mailing list
>>> Developer at lists.illumos.org
>>> http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/developer
>>
>> xdr.h: line 34.  I don't know who Jason Knig is, but its awful nice of
>> him to donate his code to us. ;-)
> Doh!
>
>> xdr_float.c: do you want to #ifdef the xdr_float_portable?  I.e. not
>> include it if we have a builtin optimized version?
> I'd need to go back and look (since it's been a while since I touched
> this), but ISTR that there was a desire for allowing
> testing/interoperability, though my feelings are if you're trying to
> deal with floating point across platforms, programmator emptor (i.e.
> don't build the portable version on optimized platforms).
>
> Unless someone chimes up in the next day or two, I'll spin a new
> webrev ~Wed with it #ifdef'd out.
>
> I will also note there is the standing issue of x86 vs sparc
> representation of +/-NaN, however that exists independent of this
> code, and this does not attempt to wade into that nightmare.
>
>> Otherwise it looks reasonable to me.
>>
>>         - Garrett
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Developer mailing list
> Developer at lists.illumos.org
> http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/developer