------- Comment #4 from kargl at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-12-15 20:34 ------- (In reply to comment #3) > I was not suggesting to introduce a new datatype for real*16, but that > the same type that is used for long double in C is available as real*16 > in Fortran, if the option -m128bit-long-double is used.
C's long double type is mapped to REAL(kind=10) on ia32. You can read the top of trans-type.c to see how kinds are determined and perhaps learn why real*16 will never happen on ia32. > This request is not outlandish --- there are other compilers that > support IEEE's 10 byte type as real*16, introducing 6 bytes of padding. The other compilers have more than 5 unpaid volunteers working full time of said compilers. > It is customary in FORTRAN 77 to name data types after the number of > bytes that they use. "Customary" is not a part of any version of Fortran standard. In fact, REAL*n isn't in any version of the standard. > While it is not necessary that GFortran follows this convention, it > would simplify porting FORTRAN 77 applications to GFortran, and I > would like to see that feature. Porting code involves more than flipping a switch. Assuming REAL*16 means REAL(KIND=10)+6 bytes of padding for all codes that have a REAL*16 is just plain stupid. But, you have the source code and patches to implement the feature are always welcomed. I, however, think you've greatly under estimated the task. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22629
