28 Aug
2009
28 Aug
'09
9:01 p.m.
On Aug 28, 2009, at 03:24 , Ketil Malde wrote:
What puzzled me (and the parent article indicated), was that Python appeared to be able to work with more precision, and thus be more "numerically correct" than GHC. Since it's all machine precision floating point, this is even more strange, and I couldn't reproduce the behavior for any other numbers than the one used in the example.
-fexcess-precision or other gcc compile options? -- brandon s. allbery [solaris,freebsd,perl,pugs,haskell] allbery@kf8nh.com system administrator [openafs,heimdal,too many hats] allbery@ece.cmu.edu electrical and computer engineering, carnegie mellon university KF8NH