This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: float to int conversions

From: Alan Modra <amodra at bigpond dot net dot au>
To: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2003 12:18:41 +1030
Subject: Re: float to int conversions
References: <20030226123257.GV31111@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030226220909.GC23068@redhat.com> <20030227000728.GX31111@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <20030227004605.GA23199@redhat.com>

On Wed, Feb 26, 2003 at 04:46:05PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > That way we could enable FLOAT_FIX_NANS_TO_ZERO
> > and FLOAT_FIX_BOUND_OVERFLOW for Java, and C, C++ and Fortran would
> > just get FLOAT_FIX_BOUND_OVERFLOW, resulting in minimal overhead.
> 
> Um, why would C, C++ and Fortran get FLOAT_FIX_BOUND_OVERFLOW?

Because the extra overhead is minimal.  As you note, on powerpc we're
only talking about additional code on real -> unsigned conversions,
where we need to emit multiple instructions anyway.

-- 
Alan Modra
IBM OzLabs - Linux Technology Centre

Follow-Ups:
- Re: float to int conversions
  - From: Richard Henderson

References:
- float to int conversions
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: float to int conversions
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: float to int conversions
  - From: Alan Modra
- Re: float to int conversions
  - From: Richard Henderson

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]