This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: G95 Floating point arithmetics without GMP?
- From: law at redhat dot com
- To: Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>
- Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 15:00:49 -0600
- Subject: Re: G95 Floating point arithmetics without GMP?
- Reply-to: law at redhat dot com
In message <1020888612.759.77.camel@steven>, Steven Bosscher writes:
> Op wo 08-05-2002, om 21:15 schreef Zack Weinberg:
> > On Wed, May 08, 2002 at 08:46:52PM +0200, Steven Bosscher wrote:
> > >
> > > For example, g95 can simplify exponentiation expressions (A**B) but
> > > since C doesn't have that operator, REAL_ARITHMETICS doesn't allow me to
> > > use eldexp() in real.c (there's no POWER_EXPR tree code).
> > You should add one.
> > In general, do not hesitate to add tree codes to tree.def when they
> > can reasonably express a language-independent concept. POWER_EXPR is
> > one such.
> I defined it in f95-tree.def because I thought it shouldn't be in
It's a generic enough concept that it probably should migrate into
the toplevel tree.def.
> I think that right now GCC can generate code for all tree codes defined
> in tree.def (right?).
Not always. It's dependent on the processor; if we don't have an instruction
for the operation and we can't open-code it using other primitives, then
we call out to a library.