Re: [libgfortran] PR 16137: libgfortran on non-C99 targets

[Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>]

On Fri, Aug 06, 2004 at 10:04:47PM +0200, Toon Moene wrote:
> I put this question up to J3.  I think the answer might not be the 
> obvious, although the most senior member in charge of floating point 
> behaviour differs with my interpretation, especially with regard to the 
> question whether a processor that sqaushes all denormals to zero is 
> standard conforming (I think it is, he thinks it isn't).

Seems to me that if the system reliably squashes all denormals, that
that is a consistent machine model for the arithmetic, and so is 
conforming.

The problem would come when you've got a bit to flip at runtime,
and it only eliminates *some* of the denormals.  E.g. this NEAREST
thing, where one might do the computation in integer modes, and so
generate a number that you couldn't generate with actual fp 
arithmetic.


r~