This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: floating point war casualty list
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Stephen L Moshier <steve at moshier dot net>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Mon, 27 May 2002 22:31:29 -0600
- Subject: Re: floating point war casualty list
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <20020528043135.GM24897@codesourcery.com>, Zack Weinberg writes:
> as potential problems due to former use of host floating point, or
> ? h8300/h8300.h
> ? mn10200/mn10200.h
> ? mn10300/mn10300.h
> ? v850/v850.h
> ? sh/sh.h
> * romp/romp.h
> * pdp11/pdp11.h
> * i370/i370.h
> * ns32k/ns32k.h
> The H8/300, MN10200, MN10300, and V850 have no hardware floating point
> support. We use the fp-bit library for them, which simulates IEEE754;
> thus the default behavior of real.c is correct. If REAL_VALUE_TO_TARGET_*
> did not work for IEEE we would have heard about it by now.
We should probably put the mn102 on the list of things to go away for GCC 3.2;
it's not working and its not actively maintained.
The mn103 is still active and may one day have a variant with an FPU.