On Sat, Jul 14, 2007 at 12:52:09PM -0400, Michael Velez wrote:
>
>
>
> > I've got this little program I wrote to test something, and
> > it keeps giving the wrong result. I'm not inexperienced in C,
> > but I can't believe strtof (et al) are broken, so I must be
> > doing something wrong. However, I've spent hours looking at
> > this and comparing it to the man pages and don't see what I'm
> > doing wrong. strtod() and strtold() also give equally wrong
> > results. (the example program given on the strotd man page
> > works fine, BTW.)
> >
> > Can someone wield a clue-bat please? :)
> >
> > Here's the program:
> >
> > #include <stdio.h>
> > #include <math.h>
> > #include <stdlib.h>
> > #include <errno.h>
> >
> > int main (int argc, char ** argv)
> > {
> > float ldbl = 0.0;
> > char * endp;
> >
> > printf ("%s\n", argv[1]);
> >
> > errno = 0;
> > ldbl = strtof (argv[1], &endp);
> > if (errno != 0)
> > printf ("strtof failed! errno=%d\n", errno);
> >
> > printf ("%f\n", (double) ldbl);
> > printf ("%f\n", (double) strtof (argv[1], (char **)NULL));
> > printf ("%f\n", (double) atof (argv[1]));
> >
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > Compile it with:
> >
> > cc -O0 -g -o x4 x4.c
> >
> > then run it like this:
> >
> > ./x4 2.5
> >
> > and I'd EXPECT it to produce this output:
> >
> > 2.5
> > 2.5
> > 2.5
> > 2.5
> >
> > but it actually produces this:
> >
> > 2.5
> > 1075838976.000000
> > 1075838976.000000
> > 2.500000
> >
> > the typecase of the arg in the 3 printf calls makes no
> > difference. Remove it and the results are the same.
> >
> > Using an input of something other than 2.5 changes the middle
> > two lines in some way in which I haven't yet discerned a
> > pattern, but the result is still highly bogus.
> >
>
> The following strtod line works fine on my system (CentOS 5, latest updates,
> x86_64):
>
> printf ("%lf\n", (double) strtod (argv[1], (char **)NULL));
>
> For strtof, the SYNOPSIS in the man page mentions you need to add:
>
> #define _ISO_C99_SOURCE
>
> Or
>
> #define _XOPEN_SOURCE 600
>
> Either line should be added before ALL include files (note there is a
> mistake in the synopsis. There should be no = sign in the define statement
> for _XOPEN_SOURCE).
>
> The above #define lines enforces C99 compatibility rules, which is the
> revised ISO C standard which came out in 1999. As a previous responder
> suggested, you can also specify -std=gnu99 or -std=C99 on the compile line.
>
> Michael
Sorry, I forgot to mention that I'm using Centos 4.5. And the man
page here doesn't mention those #define settings. I'll give it a try,
thanks!
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.---- Fred Smith /
( /__ ,__. __ __ / __ : /
/ / / /__) / / /__) .+' Home: fredex@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
/ / (__ (___ (__(_ (___ / :__ 781-438-5471
-------------------------------- Jude 1:24,25 ---------------------------------
Attachment:
pgpYH9FoM83dX.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
