https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #15 from GCC Commits ---
The master branch has been updated by Oleg Endo :
https://gcc.gnu.org/g:e95512e2d5a317e8c043f232158df4b38186e51c
commit r15-4228-ge95512e2d5a317e8c043f232158df4b38186e51c
Author: Sébastien Michelland
Date:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #14
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-08
01:08:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
>
> > Do you have any particular example in mind?
>
> Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-b
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2012-11-07 23:56:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> Do you have any particular example in mind?
Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-bit.c with
the hand-code
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07
23:33:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> but the compiler is not much good at combining
> high-level transformations with streamlined data representation,
> ABI modification, register allocati
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2012-11-07 22:40:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Jörn,
> I was curious whether the soft fpu code of yours is also available as C/C++,
> or
> did you write it in asm only? I guess it would be an
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo 2012-11-07 21:37:47
UTC ---
Jörn,
I was curious whether the soft fpu code of yours is also available as C/C++, or
did you write it in asm only? I guess it would be an interesting bunch of code
quality tests for the
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
Oleg Endo changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #8 fr
--- Comment #7 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-02-01 03:41 ---
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hereattached a patch to fix a few problems:
>
> 1) Rounding to nearest must be infinity if the "infinitely precise result has
> a
> magniture at least 2 exp Emax (2-2exp-p)" (ansi 754/198
--- Comment #6 from christian dot bruel at st dot com 2007-01-31 13:56
---
(From update of attachment 12986)
(note: this diff was made from the wrong direction. (-) shows the newest
version. sorry
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845
--- Comment #5 from christian dot bruel at st dot com 2007-01-31 13:50
---
Created an attachment (id=12986)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12986&action=view)
fixes the nearest to infinity and divide by 0 bugs.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2984
--- Comment #4 from christian dot bruel at st dot com 2007-01-31 13:47
---
Hereattached a patch to fix a few problems:
1) Rounding to nearest must be infinity if the "infinitely precise result has a
magniture at least 2 exp Emax (2-2exp-p)" (ansi 754/1985 sect 4.1). The
implementation
--- Comment #3 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-29 19:03 ---
Created an attachment (id=12709)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12709&action=view)
ChangeLog entries for softfp-diff-20061110
The previous version was missing the enumeration of two new files.
--- Comment #2 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-29 18:52 ---
Created an attachment (id=12708)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12708&action=view)
ChangeLog entries for softfp-diff-20061110
These are the ChangeLog entries for the SH specific code.
The Chang
--- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org 2006-11-15 18:02 ---
Created an attachment (id=12624)
--> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12624&action=view)
patch
This patch has been regression tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf.
However, I need approval for the non
15 matches
Mail list logo
