From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Strange problems with data-tests.el Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:58:37 +0000 Message-ID: References: <831sb3l9cx.fsf@gnu.org> <83r2j2jpgo.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534172241 29097 195.159.176.226 (13 Aug 2018 14:57:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2018 14:57:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: eliz@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 13 16:57:17 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fpEHV-0007S8-7i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 16:57:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39925 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpEJb-0005Je-Km for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:59:27 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47339) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpEJS-0005II-5o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:59:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpEJR-0007e1-Fq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:59:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lj1-x230.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::230]:38833) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpEJQ-0007cf-4u; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 10:59:16 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lj1-x230.google.com with SMTP id p6-v6so12802763ljc.5; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 07:59:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ac5TjIizY/Z6K6/bjY5PrDxJzOOp95Qmqcd3eV8fx04=; b=viLO+OrXnQayFkAOgwQDjT5TYJ4KA9DcDCULfimkYss0ng5kl7+8bgGPFVubc63OSG Pv+CkexsXBXOR3DFoghTqDk2e+wIpv7pQ5wPJWvZryQNXL2e6Uwo5jF6rq+Zy+pDvZ8C JfbVI7hUbMbfgvsrgDW4BKKRRmfzIgSnJETVJQbYD1/bTql1SPme4bcGv4a37tazPrrr iDrMCjm1vwrJHB/UehIge8LvPbTDjA+u5us/thJXl9qtsbMdMLEzYopP0Z/3zGnN8rv2 IXXvEZQsA8a1F3lHsg7b9fdOt+NROBHJEhyi4/TwBMvqRugQtfFOmuqEpqQXTgfT6Sct PV5g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ac5TjIizY/Z6K6/bjY5PrDxJzOOp95Qmqcd3eV8fx04=; b=Pko3hMRTR6Dtnp3vJdifYVb/JhYS8q0ffj0aDboFm3tPwR7elrcdmZW5ZHn+S71TaQ 2qnS42FgZQfe2o4lAqlV0xOBROMNYqlnC40y/yzSZXGHfyC9QZ65fpBX1M8AZhciaSR1 N09yosaR/uDm1qBDH6lQm60pnL7UEy09aL29Ddu8RHxiaLkqxEalhEWk7obQL9LwbkuM Pcvx5XkArU1nIFB9R4bDWZO3PFPCoMCPA4SiYvlhIVHlmr5J03+F4F3lK+oiO8p/04NO lgHwNQOhq12iPorAxKeLVUtPfXIKVn83N99fW9jtH7QwHuKYhNXRuUka1fX5LvmwPLES dB5Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlG1Nh8bKDqWWo6bI7GSyEdAotXXLTBAL0h0dPosTUGzMmuKBRUq y1cVJr4SoFZPK1KDNgDbQqPSNWfZASy5nT3iAwmRvA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPztXQCyEkk7urx+Gbzuz1jKmB5Bse8LaIs8jpepxBIm4NPNmukUvMBAKfaM0wJLs/6xKCuY+lKsjTs4LV0QQu0= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:2114:: with SMTP id h20-v6mr13317444ljh.135.1534172354677; Mon, 13 Aug 2018 07:59:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83r2j2jpgo.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4864:20::230 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:228481 Archived-At: On Mon, Aug 13, 2018 at 2:44 PM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > I think that test is a bit misleading, as (< most-positive-fixnum (+ > > -128.0 most-positive-fixnum)) also returns true. > > Not on a 32-bit host with a 32-bit EMACS_INT, it doesn't. You're right, of course. Which is what I meant when I said the test was misleading: it's true for subtly different reasons on different hosts; (< x (+ 1.0 x)) is false on some hosts for some x smaller than most-positive-fixnum, after all.