On 1/28/25 11:43 AM, Siddhesh Poyarekar wrote:
> + return [check_runtime_nocache ppc_default_long_double_ibm {
> + ! Fortran
> + program default_long_double_ibm
> + integer, parameter :: kl = selected_real_kind (precision (0.0_8) + 1)
> + if (precision (0.0_kl) /= 31) then
> + call exit(1)
> + end if
> + end program default_long_double_ibm
> + }]
> +}
I have no strong objection to the test case, but would it be easier to just
check for the existence of the __LONG_DOUBLE_IBM128__ predefined macro?
I think this would also return true for a long double == double build
(ie, -mlong-double-64). Maybe we should instead have a positive test
ppc_default_long_double_ieee and xfail using ! ppc_default_long_double_ieee?
If we go the ppc_default_long_double_ieee route, you can check for the
existence of __LONG_DOUBLE_IEEE128__.
Peter
