== comparison of two doubles on an 80386 not right?

[Flint Pellett]

I came across something today which has me quite baffled: some old
code I found was trying to test equality of two successive long
values by testing for equality of a union'ed double on top of them.
Such a thing obviously isn't portable, (and I fixed it to use integer
comparisons) but what has me confused is what it _was_ doing: it works
differently on a 3B2 from the way it works on a 386 (both SYSV UNIX).
If the endian-ness difference is the explanation, I don't see how.
Here is a test program with output from the 3B2 and the 386:

--------- CUT HERE ------------
typedef union {
	double	f;
	struct {
		long l1;
		long l2;
	} l;
} BOTH;

main()
{
	BOTH var1, var2;
	/* Construct two significantly different 64 bit bitmaps, then
	** try to compare them by comparing the floating point values. */
	var1.l.l1 = var2.l.l1 = 0L;

	/* any value of l.l2 from 64 to 127 produces "They match" on a 386,
	** but values of .l2 from <63 or >128 produce "They do NOT match".
	** On the 3B2 it doesn't match unless var1.l.l2 == var2.l.l2 */
	var1.l.l2 = 127L;
	var2.l.l2 = 100L;

	if (var1.f == var2.f)
		(void)printf("They match %lg %lg\n",var1.f,var2.f);
	else
		(void)printf("They do NOT match %lg %lg\n",var1.f,var2.f);
}

--------- CUT HERE ------------
386 output is: They match 2.69493e-312 2.122e-312
3B2 output is: They do NOT match 6.27463e-322 4.94066e-322

Can anyone explain this?  That the 386 would tell me the two values
are equal and then display different values has me totally perplexed.
I suppose the answer is obvious and I'll feel like a fool for posting
this, but I sure don't see it.  (I know why the values the 3B2
has aren't the same as on the 386: the question is how come the
386 thinks 2.69 == 2.12.)
-- 
Flint Pellett, Global Information Systems Technology, Inc.
1800 Woodfield Drive, Savoy, IL  61874     (217) 352-1165
uunet!gistdev!flint or flint at gistdev.gist.com