https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95640
--- Comment #10 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org --- (In reply to Steve Kargl from comment #9) > On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 10:14:21AM -0700, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > > IEEE-754 calls binary32, 64, 128 the basic formats (Sec. 3, p. 6): > > > > Five basic formats are defined in this clause: > > Three binary formats, with encodings in lengths of 32, 64, and 128 bits. > > Two decimal formats, with encodings in lengths of 64 and 128 bits. > > > > Additional arithmetic formats are recommended for extending these basic > > formats (see 3.7). > > > > If J3 really intended that IEEE_SELECTED_REAL_KIND return a kind for one of > > IEEE-754 basic formats, then it ought to say that. Looks like a defect > > in the Fortran standard. > > > > If one looks into 3.7 (p. 14), it further recommends > > > > Language standards should define mechanisms supporting extendable > > precision for each supported radix. > > > > I have asked on the J3 mailing list if Section 17 should > be restricted to the basic formats. https://mailman.j3-fortran.org/pipermail/j3/2020-June/012148.html Bill, is Malcolm's feedback sufficient? This may fall under some processors may not support the Intel-80 floating point format under Section 17 of the Standard. I'll leave the bug report open for others to chime in. Perhaps, others would rather not have a difference between gfortran and Cray and Intel compilers.
