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

[Jason King]

Here's the webrev: http://cr.illumos.org/view/w79cjkxp/

I'm running a fresh nightly, should have that in a bit..

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 11:24 AM, Garrett D'Amore <garrett at nexenta.com> wrote:
> No worries, I just want to integrate your change.
>
> Jason King <jason.brian.king at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Sorry, last week got _very_ busy with work (culminating in a 32-hour
>>weekend, so I've been brain dead most of this week).  I'll try to get
>>to it tonight.
>>
>>
>>On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 1:46 AM, Garrett D'Amore <garrett at nexenta.com> wrote:
>>>  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
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Developer mailing list
>>> Developer at lists.illumos.org
>>> http://lists.illumos.org/m/listinfo/developer
>>>
>