Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 20:30:15 +0300 From: Eugene Sharygin <eush77@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com,Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> Subject: Re: 32-bit double and long double Hi Rich, On 26 November 2018 20:03:39 GMT+03:00, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: >On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 06:25:04PM +0300, Eugene Sharygin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> We're using Musl on a platform where both float, double, and long >double >> are in IEEE-754 binary32 format, and I'm wondering if a patch that >lifts >> some of the assumptions made regarding widths of floating-point types >> would be accepted. > >No, musl only supports (roughly) Annex-F conforming environments, with >IEEE single and double and a long double type with IEEE-compatible >semantics. Such patches won't be accepted upstream. > >Is there a reason your target is defining double in an unuseful and >incompatible way rather than doing hard-single and soft-double? If you >have any control over the choice of ABI, I think the latter makes a >lot more sense. I guess it does. The platform is very memory constrained though, so we'll have to evaluate first. Thank you for suggestion! Eugene >> Here is the relevant excerpt from the documentation: >> >> > Floating-point formats are assumed to be IEEE-754 binary32 format >for >> > float and IEEE-754 binary64 for double. >> > >> > Supported long double formats: IEEE-754 binary64 (ld64) and x86 80 >bit >> > extended precision format (ld80) are fully supported and there is >> > partial support for IEEE-754 binary128 (ld128).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.