gforth
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [gforth] Strange behavior of f! etc.


From: Charles G Montgomery
Subject: Re: [gforth] Strange behavior of f! etc.
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:31:47 -0500
User-agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.1.0-1-amd64; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; )

On Sunday 12 February 2012 8:10:34 PM David Kuehling wrote:
> >>>>> "Charles" == Charles G Montgomery <address@hidden> 
writes:
> > On Sunday 12 February 2012 6:22:20 PM Marcel Hendrix wrote:
> >> What has changed? It appears something is wrong with array
> >> indexing. However, the official Gforth files from the FSL
> >> (http://www.taygeta.com/fsl/scilib.html) are used? 
> >> X-Online-Scanned: by Cloudmark authority (on smtp09.online.nl)
> >> 
> >> I have append all three files under question.
> >> 
> >> Sequences of pi xx{ 1 } f!  xx{ 1 } f@ f. seem to work.  Putting
> >> it inside a do loop in a definition fails as shown.
> >> 
> >> -marcel ....
> > 
> > This doesn't seem to happen with just gforth rather than
> > gforth-fast. (Debian Version: 0.7.0+ds1-6 ) I see David Kuehling
> > <address@hidden> finds this too.
> 
> Do you say you can reproduce the bug report on debian i386 with
> gforth-fast?  For me the bug doesn't happen at all, neither with
> gforth-fast nor gforth.  But then I didn't try a i386 version of
> gforth (only amd64 and 32-bit mipsel).
> 
> cheers,
> 
> David

Stranger and stranger.  When I use gforth-fast on amd64 I do not see 
Marcel's problem; it runs correctly with either gforth or gforth-fast.
So I tried it on i386.  There I get (apparently) correct results with 
gforth.  But with gforth-fast I get different results for "32 wtest-
init",  The xx{ array starts with 195.09 11.8997 17.849 ... instead of
195.09 382.683 555.57 ...
If I continue by running "walsh-test", the transform and its inverse are 
consistent.
(The Debian version is 0.7.0+dsl-6 but for the i386 architecture.)

So something is wrong somewhere, but I don't know where.  Maybe I can 
look further tomorrow.

regards   cgm



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]