Hi,
Previously effective target fortran_real_c_float128 never
passes on Power regardless of the default 128 long double
is ibmlongdouble or ieeelongdouble. It's due to that TF
mode is always used for kind 16 real, which has precision
127, while the node float128_type_node for c_float128 has
128 t
Hi,
on 2024/5/9 06:01, Steve Kargl wrote:
> On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 01:27:53PM +0800, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>>
>> Previously effective target fortran_real_c_float128 never
>> passes on Power regardless of the default 128 long double
>> is ibmlongdouble or ieeelongdouble.
Hi Harald,
on 2024/6/4 04:01, Harald Anlauf wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Am 03.06.24 um 05:00 schrieb Kewen Lin:
>> Joseph pointed out "floating types should have their mode,
>> not a poorly defined precision value" in the discussion[1],
>> as he and Richi suggested, the existing macros
>> {FLOAT,{,LONG_}DOU
Hi Mike,
I guess you should CC fortran@gcc.gnu.org as well.
on 2024/7/11 01:25, Michael Meissner wrote:
> If you build a little endian compiler and select a default CPU of power5
> (i.e. --with-cpu=power5), GCC cannot be built. The reason is that both the
> libgfortran and libstdc++-v3 libraries
Hi Piotr,
Thanks for doing this, some comments are inlined.
on 2022/5/11 07:32, Piotr Kubaj via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Is there anything more required?
>
> On 22-05-03 12:33:43, Piotr Kubaj wrote:
>> Here are gmake check-gfortran results requested by FX.
>>
>> Before patching:
>> =
on 2022/5/13 04:16, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> Hi Piotr,
>
> On Tue, May 03, 2022 at 12:21:12PM +0200, pku...@freebsd.org wrote:
>> FreeBSD/powerpc* has feenableexcept() defined in fenv.h header.
>
> Declared, not defined. These are required to be real functions (on all
> platforms that have th
Hi Haochen,
on 2023/3/1 15:09, HAO CHEN GUI wrote:
> Hi,
> The patch escalates the failure when Hollerith constant to real conversion
> fails in native_interpret_expr. It finally reports an "Unclassifiable
> statement" error.
>
> The patch of pr95450 added a verification for decoding/encoding
Hi Haochen,
on 2023/3/3 20:54, Tobias Burnus wrote:
> Hi Haochen,
>
> On 03.03.23 10:56, HAO CHEN GUI via Gcc-patches wrote:
>> Sure, I will merge it into the patch and do the regression test.
> Thanks :-)
>> Additionally, Kewen suggested:
Since this test case is powerpc only, I think it can