Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #93425 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-07-03 00:52 +1000 |
| Last post | 2015-07-05 09:38 +0200 |
| Articles | 3 on this page of 23 — 16 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
Bug in floating point multiplication Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-03 00:52 +1000
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Michael Poeltl <michael.poeltl@univie.ac.at> - 2015-07-02 17:10 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-03 01:21 +1000
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Robin Becker <robin@reportlab.com> - 2015-07-02 16:24 +0100
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2015-07-02 08:26 -0700
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-07-03 01:34 +1000
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-03 01:41 +1000
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:38 -0600
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Vincent Vande Vyvre <vincent.vande.vyvre@telenet.be> - 2015-07-02 17:15 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:28 -0600
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Robin Becker <robin@reportlab.com> - 2015-07-02 16:29 +0100
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-07-02 09:32 -0600
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-07-03 01:42 +1000
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication duncan smith <buzzard@invalid.invalid> - 2015-07-02 17:08 +0100
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-07-02 17:20 +0100
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Tim Chase <python.list@tim.thechases.com> - 2015-07-02 11:59 -0500
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2015-07-02 19:49 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Ned Deily <nad@acm.org> - 2015-07-02 22:07 -0700
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Irmen de Jong <irmen.NOSPAM@xs4all.nl> - 2015-07-03 18:27 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Laurent Pointal <laurent.pointal@free.fr> - 2015-07-02 23:12 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-03 16:13 +0100
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-07-05 00:54 +0200
Re: Bug in floating point multiplication Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> - 2015-07-05 09:38 +0200
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Oscar Benjamin <oscar.j.benjamin@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-03 16:13 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.275.1435936461.3674.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #93425 |
On 2 July 2015 at 18:29, Jason Swails <jason.swails@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> As others have suggested, this is almost certainly a 32-bit vs. 64-bit
> issue. Consider the following C program:
>
> // maths.h
> #include <math.h>
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> int main() {
> double x;
> int i;
> x = 1-pow(0.5, 53);
>
> for (i = 1; i < 1000000; i++) {
> if ((int)(i*x) == i) {
> printf("%d\n", i);
> break;
> }
> }
>
> return 0;
> }
>
> For the most part, this should be as close to an exact transliteration of
> your Python code as possible.
>
> Here's what I get when I try compiling and running it on my 64-bit (Gentoo)
> Linux machine with 32-bit compatible libs:
>
> swails@batman ~/test $ gcc maths.c
> swails@batman ~/test $ ./a.out
> swails@batman ~/test $ gcc -m32 maths.c
> swails@batman ~/test $ ./a.out
> 2049
I was unable to reproduce this on my system. In both cases the loops
run to completion. A look at the assembly generated by gcc shows that
something different goes on there though.
The loop in the 64 bit one (in the main function) looks like:
$ objdump -d a.out | less
...
400555: pxor %xmm0,%xmm0
400559: cvtsi2sdl -0xc(%rbp),%xmm0
40055e: mulsd -0x8(%rbp),%xmm0
400563: cvttsd2si %xmm0,%eax
400567: cmp -0xc(%rbp),%eax
40056a: jne 400582 <main+0x4c>
40056c: mov -0xc(%rbp),%eax
40056f: mov %eax,%esi
400571: mov $0x400624,%edi
400576: mov $0x0,%eax
40057b: callq 400410 <printf@plt>
400580: jmp 40058f <main+0x59>
400582: addl $0x1,-0xc(%rbp)
400586: cmpl $0xf423f,-0xc(%rbp)
40058d: jle 400555 <main+0x1f>
...
Where is the 32 bit one looks like:
$ objdump -d a.out.32 | less
...
804843e: fildl -0x14(%ebp)
8048441: fmull -0x10(%ebp)
8048444: fnstcw -0x1a(%ebp)
8048447: movzwl -0x1a(%ebp),%eax
804844b: mov $0xc,%ah
804844d: mov %ax,-0x1c(%ebp)
8048451: fldcw -0x1c(%ebp)
8048454: fistpl -0x20(%ebp)
8048457: fldcw -0x1a(%ebp)
804845a: mov -0x20(%ebp),%eax
804845d: cmp -0x14(%ebp),%eax
8048460: jne 8048477 <main+0x5c>
8048462: sub $0x8,%esp
8048465: pushl -0x14(%ebp)
8048468: push $0x8048520
804846d: call 80482f0 <printf@plt>
8048472: add $0x10,%esp
8048475: jmp 8048484 <main+0x69>
8048477: addl $0x1,-0x14(%ebp)
804847b: cmpl $0xf423f,-0x14(%ebp)
8048482: jle 804843e <main+0x23>
...
So the 64 bit one is using SSE instructions and the 32-bit one is
using x87. That could explain the difference you see at the C level
but I don't see it on this CPU (/proc/cpuinfo says Intel(R) Core(TM)
i5-3427U CPU @ 1.80GHz).
--
Oscar
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-05 00:54 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.294.1436050467.3674.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #93425 |
In a message of Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:52:55 +1000, "Steven D'Aprano" writes: >Despite the title, this is not one of the usual "Why can't Python do >maths?" "bug" reports. > >Can anyone reproduce this behaviour? If so, please reply with the version of >Python and your operating system. Printing sys.version will probably do. > > >x = 1 - 1/2**53 >assert x == 0.9999999999999999 >for i in range(1, 1000000): > if int(i*x) == i: > print(i); break > > >Using Jython and IronPython, the loop runs to completion. That is the >correct behaviour, or so I am lead to believe. Using Python 2.6, 2.7 and >3.3 on Centos and Debian, it prints 2049 and breaks. That should not >happen. If you can reproduce that (for any value of i, not necessarily >2049), please reply. > >See also http://bugs.python.org/issue24546 for more details. > > > >-- >Steven PyPy says: Python 2.7.9 (2.5.1+dfsg-1, Mar 27 2015, 19:45:43) [PyPy 2.5.1 with GCC 4.9.2] on linux2 Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>>> x = 1 - 1/2**53 >>>> assert x == 0.9999999999999999 Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> AssertionError >>>> for i in range(1, 1000000): .... if int(i*x) == i: .... print(i); break .... .... 1 >>>> So the loop terminates, but there is an Assertion Error. Did you want that? Laura
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Peter Otten <__peter__@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-07-05 09:38 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <mailman.302.1436081928.3674.python-list@python.org> |
| In reply to | #93425 |
Laura Creighton wrote: > In a message of Fri, 03 Jul 2015 00:52:55 +1000, "Steven D'Aprano" writes: >>Despite the title, this is not one of the usual "Why can't Python do >>maths?" "bug" reports. >> >>Can anyone reproduce this behaviour? If so, please reply with the version >>of Python and your operating system. Printing sys.version will probably >>do. >> >> >>x = 1 - 1/2**53 >>assert x == 0.9999999999999999 >>for i in range(1, 1000000): >> if int(i*x) == i: >> print(i); break >> >> >>Using Jython and IronPython, the loop runs to completion. That is the >>correct behaviour, or so I am lead to believe. Using Python 2.6, 2.7 and >>3.3 on Centos and Debian, it prints 2049 and breaks. That should not >>happen. If you can reproduce that (for any value of i, not necessarily >>2049), please reply. >> >>See also http://bugs.python.org/issue24546 for more details. >> >> >> >>-- >>Steven > > PyPy says: > Python 2.7.9 (2.5.1+dfsg-1, Mar 27 2015, 19:45:43) > [PyPy 2.5.1 with GCC 4.9.2] on linux2 > Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information. >>>>> x = 1 - 1/2**53 >>>>> assert x == 0.9999999999999999 > Traceback (most recent call last): > File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> > AssertionError >>>>> for i in range(1, 1000000): > .... if int(i*x) == i: > .... print(i); break > .... > .... > 1 >>>>> > > So the loop terminates, but there is an Assertion Error. Did you want > that? No. Steven's environment implies from __future__ import division which he forgot to mention in the original post: >>>> x = 1-1/2**53 >>>> x 1 >>>> from __future__ import division >>>> x = 1-1/2**53 >>>> x 0.9999999999999999
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web