Re: [G95] Re: [tree-ssa] Integrating g95

[Steven Bosscher <s dot bosscher at student dot tudelft dot nl>]

Paul Brook wrote:

> On Sunday 01 June 2003 3:08 am, law@redhat.com wrote:
>  
>
> > [ I suspect asking the g95 folks to rewrite their code to avoid GMP
> >  probably isn't going to be well received :-) ]
> >    
>
> We (g95 developers) have had discussions about this previously, but noone 
> was able to come up with a good alternative solution.
>
> Even GMP isn't ideal. The main limitation from our point of view is that 
> AFAIK it is unable to represent NaN's.
>
> It's also possible that GMP could give different answers compared to the 
> target representation due to differing rounding errors. I haven'd looked 
> too closely, so I guess this could be avided if you're careful.
>
> Paul Brook
>
>  
GMP does not support NaN, Inf, signals and IEEE 754 rounding modes.  How 
wonderful then, that there is a replacement that does:
http://swox.com/gmp/mpfr/Introduction-to-MPFR.html#Introduction%20to%20MPFR

I was looking into moving g95 from GMP to MPFR recently (before my compu 
mishap).  It looks very doable; in fact we could just try it because 
there is a GMP compatibility header available.

I am not sure if this is an official GNU project, but the copyright is 
with the FSF.

If depending on GMP is really such a big deal, then we could collect the 
bits and pieces we really need and make our own libary.  Using GMP 
really is overkill, it provides far more than what we use in g95.

Gr.
Steven