Re: [PATCH v2] ucrtbase: Make the strtod implementation C99 compatible

[Piotr Caban]

On 09/21/15 15:08, Martin Storsjo wrote:
>       if(d>MSVCRT_UI64_MAX/10 || hlp<d) {

Please also update overflow checking rules (use base instead of 10).
> +static void test_strtod(void)
> +{
> - test_strtod_str("infinity", INFINITY, 8);
> - test_strtod_str("INFINITY", INFINITY, 8);
> - test_strtod_str("InFiNiTy", INFINITY, 8);
> - test_strtod_str("INF", INFINITY, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("-inf", -INFINITY, 4);
> - test_strtod_str("inf42", INFINITY, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("inffoo", INFINITY, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("infini", INFINITY, 3);
> -
> - test_strtod_str("NAN", NAN, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("nan", NAN, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("NaN", NAN, 3);
> -
> - test_strtod_str("0x42", 66, 4);
> - test_strtod_str("0X42", 66, 4);
> - test_strtod_str("-0x42", -66, 5);
> - test_strtod_str("0x1p1", 2, 5);
> - test_strtod_str("0x1P1", 2, 5);
> - test_strtod_str("0x1p+1", 2, 6);
> - test_strtod_str("0x2p-1", 1, 6);
> - test_strtod_str("0xA", 10, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("0xa", 10, 3);
> - test_strtod_str("0xABCDEF", 11259375, 8);
> - test_strtod_str("0Xabcdef", 11259375, 8);
> -
> - test_strtod_str("0x1.1", 1.0625, 5);
> - test_strtod_str("0x1.1p1", 2.125, 7);

Could you please also add few more tests, like:
test_strtod_str("0x1.A", ...); /*to show that part after decimal point 
is correctly handling hexadecimal digits */
test_strtod_str("0x1p1a", ...); /* to show that exponential part is not 
handling hexadecimal digits */

Thanks,
Piotr

[PATCH v2] ucrtbase: Make the strtod implementation C99 compatible

[Martin Storsjö]

On Tue, 29 Sep 2015, Piotr Caban wrote:
> On 09/21/15 15:08, Martin Storsjo wrote:
> >       if(d>MSVCRT_UI64_MAX/10 || hlp<d) {
>
> Please also update overflow checking rules (use base instead of 10).
> > +static void test_strtod(void)
> > +{
> > - test_strtod_str("infinity", INFINITY, 8);
> > - test_strtod_str("INFINITY", INFINITY, 8);
> > - test_strtod_str("InFiNiTy", INFINITY, 8);
> > - test_strtod_str("INF", INFINITY, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("-inf", -INFINITY, 4);
> > - test_strtod_str("inf42", INFINITY, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("inffoo", INFINITY, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("infini", INFINITY, 3);
> > -
> > - test_strtod_str("NAN", NAN, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("nan", NAN, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("NaN", NAN, 3);
> > -
> > - test_strtod_str("0x42", 66, 4);
> > - test_strtod_str("0X42", 66, 4);
> > - test_strtod_str("-0x42", -66, 5);
> > - test_strtod_str("0x1p1", 2, 5);
> > - test_strtod_str("0x1P1", 2, 5);
> > - test_strtod_str("0x1p+1", 2, 6);
> > - test_strtod_str("0x2p-1", 1, 6);
> > - test_strtod_str("0xA", 10, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("0xa", 10, 3);
> > - test_strtod_str("0xABCDEF", 11259375, 8);
> > - test_strtod_str("0Xabcdef", 11259375, 8);
> > -
> > - test_strtod_str("0x1.1", 1.0625, 5);
> > - test_strtod_str("0x1.1p1", 2.125, 7);
>
> Could you please also add few more tests, like:
> test_strtod_str("0x1.A", ...); /*to show that part after decimal point is 
> correctly handling hexadecimal digits */
> test_strtod_str("0x1p1a", ...); /* to show that exponential part is not 
> handling hexadecimal digits */

Thanks, updated patch sent. (Although I missed to add your comments at the 
end of the test lines, which I only notice now when replying.)

// Martin