This is the mail archive of the gcc@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]

Re: expand and truncate and 387



>   > > I don't think the x86 backend worries about rounding and truncation on
>   > > fp->fp conversions.
>   > 
>   > Assuming the usual long-double precision control setting,
>   > converting from lower to higher precision is a no-op.
> Is that something we can safely assume?  I don't think so.

That the setting would not always be long double?  Right, there has
been at least one attempt (at Next) to make the compiler adjust the
settings to match the source program declarations.  Also, if you
wanted the status flags to be "correct" in the IEEE sense, it
might take more than a no-op to accomplish that.



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