|
Boost :
|
- Next message: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Previous message: James E. King, III: "[boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- In reply to: James E. King, III: "[boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Next in thread: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Peter Dimov: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
James E. King, III wrote:
> For folks who like (potential) compiler optimization bugs:
> https://svn.boost.org/trac10/ticket/13247
Looking at the source of independent_bits, this jumps out at me:
S = (S << w0) + (u & y0_mask);
and later
S = (S << (w0 + 1)) + (u & y1_mask);
Shifts with a value more than the number of bits are undefined, and
debugging confirms that w0 is 32 in the failing tests.
Re Trac, I just enabled Github Issues for Random. Perhaps we finally need to
do that for all libraries.
- Next message: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Previous message: James E. King, III: "[boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- In reply to: James E. King, III: "[boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Next in thread: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Andrey Semashev: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Peter Dimov: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
- Reply: Steven Watanabe: "Re: [boost] Boost Trac, random, No-Maintainer?"
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk