About GSOC.

Martin Jambor mjambor@suse.cz
Fri May 31 10:11:00 GMT 2019

On Thu, May 30 2019, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 07:08:45PM +0200, Martin Jambor wrote:
>> Interesting, I was also puzzled for a moment.  But notice that:
>> int main ()
>> {
>>     _Float128 x = 18446744073709551617.5f128;
>>     _Float128 y = __builtin_roundf128 (x);
>> }
>> behaves as expected... the difference is of course the suffix pegged to
>> the literal constant (see
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-9.1.0/gcc/Floating-Types.html).
>> I would also expect GCC to use a larger type if a constant does not fit
>> into a double, but apparently that does not happen.  I would have to
>> check but it is probably the right behavior according to the standard.
> "An unsuffixed floating constant has type double."  I don't
> think your suggestion would be okay?

Sorry if I was not clear but I was definitely not suggesting that we
change this (or anything).  I wrote that I was also surprised but
believed that GCC was doing the correct thing.

Thanks for pointing out where exactly the standard says what has to be
done though.


More information about the Gcc mailing list