This is the mail archive of the java@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the Java 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: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN

From: Richard Henderson <rth at redhat dot com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, java at gcc dot gnu dot org, mmitchell at codesourcery dot com
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 14:58:41 -0800
Subject: Re: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
References: <87zno1t0gj.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <20030313012718.GC1182@redhat.com> <87isunxfj1.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <20030313191312.GA30854@redhat.com> <87d6kvxami.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>

On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 12:41:25PM -0800, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> >>    0x1.0p+INF
> >>    0x1.xxxxxxp+NAN (QNAN, SNAN)
> >> 
> >> which would require less fragile special-casing of builtin functions, etc.)
> >
> > Doesn't that run afoul of p-numbers etc?
> 
> No.  Arbitrary sequences of identifier-nondigits may appear at any
> position in a pp-number except immediately before [+-] (where [eEpP]
> is required).  See C99 6.4.8p1,2.

Hmm.  Well, there's still time to change our minds here.  GCC 3.3 has
not yet been released, so there is no release that promises __builtin_inf
et al will be evaluable in a constant context...

Do folks think the proposal above is a good idea?  Mark, I know you
balked at the builtin function thing before...

r~

References:
- Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
  - From: Richard Henderson
- Re: Squelch HOST_FLOAT_WORDS_BIG_ENDIAN
  - From: Zack Weinberg

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