https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
See Also|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #12 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by hongtao Liu :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:415091f09096a0ebba1fdcd4af8c2fda24cfd411
commit r14-9588-g415091f09096a0ebba1fdcd4af8c2fda24cfd411
Author: liuhongt
Date: Mon Mar
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #11 from Andrew Pinski ---
(In reply to Paul Eggert from comment #10)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> > You can use -fexcess-precision=16 if you don't want treating _Float16 and
> > __bf16 as having excess precision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #10 from Paul Eggert ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> You can use -fexcess-precision=16 if you don't want treating _Float16 and
> __bf16 as having excess precision. With excess precision, I think the above
> behavio
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #9 from Hongtao Liu ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> > You can use -fexcess-precision=16 if you don't want treating _Float16 and
> > __bf16 as having excess precision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #7)
> (In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> > You can use -fexcess-precision=16 if you don't want treating _Float16 and
> > __bf16 as having excess precision.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #6)
> You can use -fexcess-precision=16 if you don't want treating _Float16 and
> __bf16 as having excess precision. With excess precision, I think the above
> behav
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #6
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||liuhongt at gcc dot gnu.org,
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #4 from Joseph S. Myers ---
I think it's correct that conversions (explicit or implicit) from a value with
excess precision convert only once; they don't first remove excess range and
precision and then convert to the target type.
T
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
CC|
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #2 from Paul Eggert ---
(In reply to Andrew Pinski from comment #1)
> I am not so sure that 257.0bf16 gets rounded to 256.
It should get rounded to 256, since 257 has no exact representation in __bf16
and 256 is the closest represen
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114347
--- Comment #1 from Andrew Pinski ---
Hmm, I am not so sure that 257.0bf16 gets rounded to 256.
13 matches
Mail list logo
