GNU bug report logs - #32463
27.0.50; (logior -1) => 4611686018427387903

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton <at> gmail.com>
To: 32463 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#32463: 27.0.50; (logior -1) => 4611686018427387903
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2018 14:24:02 +0100

On Fri 17 Aug 2018, Pip Cet wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 17, 2018 at 9:34 AM Andy Moreton <andrewjmoreton <at> gmail.com> wrote:
> Paul committed a patch in the meantime (independently, I think?) which
> does add tests. I'll try to write some more.

Thanks. I should have done that with my patches to fix some bignum bugs.

>> The tdiv/fdiv were
>> added to give expected results. Pay particular attention to values around
>> most-positive-fixnum and most-negative-fixnum.
>
> I don't think they do give the expected results. We should discuss
> that in more detail, but first, can we agree that lsh and ash behave
> the same for bignums? If so, clearly one branch of the code you quoted
> is incorrect, and I think it's the tdiv one.

I agree that for bignums lsh and ash should behave the same way. I can
easily belive that there are bugs in this code, as I was fighting
problems with 64bit Windows having 32bit long at the same time.

> I ran:
>
> (require 'cl)
>
> (let ((i 0))
>   (while (< i 128)
>     (message "%d %x" i (lsh (- (lsh -1 i) 1) -1))
>     (incf i)))

Or equivalently:
  (dotimes (i 128) (message "%d %x" i (lsh (1- (lsh -1 i)) -1)))

> and got this output:
>
> [...]
> 57 -100000000000001
> 58 -200000000000001
> 59 -400000000000001
> 60 -800000000000001
> 61 -1000000000000000
> 62 -2000000000000000
> 63 -4000000000000000
> 64 -8000000000000000
> [...]
>
> Something is wrong there.

Yes, this is clearly not behaving correctly and needs to be fixed.
Thanks for investigating this.

    AndyM

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.