From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,dcd6a6bea1586410 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-05-05 11:09:44 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!cambridge1-snf1.gtei.net!news.gtei.net!bos-service1.ext.raytheon.com!bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com.POSTED!not-for-mail Message-ID: <3EB6A8DD.D67AF5F9@raytheon.com> From: Mark Johnson X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: gcc 3.2.3 and trancendental functions References: <030520030858096351%hopperj@macconnect.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 13:09:33 -0500 NNTP-Posting-Host: 192.27.48.39 X-Complaints-To: news@ext.ray.com X-Trace: bos-service2.ext.raytheon.com 1052158183 192.27.48.39 (Mon, 05 May 2003 14:09:43 EDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 May 2003 14:09:43 EDT Organization: Raytheon Company Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:36984 Date: 2003-05-05T13:09:33-05:00 List-Id: jim hopper wrote: > > We have a problem. we have a couple new linux boxes. one is red hat 8, > the other in 9.0. when i try to run our radar sim it hangs. finally > traced it down to a problem with sin/cos etc. so i created a little > program that just calls cosine with 45" (tried both degrees version > and radians. the cos returns NAN. [attempts snipped] > > Does anyone have any insight into why transendentals fail on gcc 3.2.3 > compiler?? Hmm. I'm running with the new compiler and have not seen any problems like that. I tried both: cos(45.0, 360.0); and cos(pi*45.0/180.0); with a test program and both yield 7.07107E-01 as expected. This is with GNAT 5.00a (an ACT supported GCC 3 version) and Red Hat 7.3 (w/ a custom 2.4.20 kernel). Unless your test program does something significantly different, I don't understand the problem. Perhaps you can post the test program? It may be more dependent on the changes Red Hat put into the RH 9 release. I know glibc has a number of significant changes - perhaps something there is a problem. You may also want to check Bugzilla at Red Hat to see if other people are having problems w/ numeric functions. Another thought - when you built on RH 8 and moved it to RH 9, was the application built with the static libraries? If not, I suggest you try that as well. --Mark