https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||13.0
Target Milestone|12.4
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.3|12.4
--- Comment #18 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Richard Biener changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.2|12.3
--- Comment #17 from Richard
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|12.0|12.2
--- Comment #16 from Jakub Jelinek
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #15 from Francois-Xavier Coudert ---
Created attachment 52094
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=52094=edit
Tentative patch, adding IEEE_FMA and IEEE_SIGNBIT
I am attaching a tentative patch for the issue. I also
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Francois-Xavier Coudert changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org |fxcoudert at gcc dot
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #13 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to ally.alto.0z from comment #12)
> Bill you say you are a “master engineer” and have 25 years of Fortran
> experience and are a principal member of a Fortran committee.
>
> Would it be
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
ally.alto.0z at icloud dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ally.alto.0z at icloud
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #11 from Steve Kargl ---
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 02:22:46AM +, jvdelisle at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
>
> --- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
> It is very likely that the gcc
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #10 from Jerry DeLisle ---
It is very likely that the gcc optimizers will actually convert the to fma
machine instructions, but no guarantee.
I don't have much time, but it is likely some of the tricks we used in matmul
can be used
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #9 from kargl at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to kargl from comment #8)
>
> Short of someone diving in, there is always the kludge of ...
>
This is a better kludge, but is far from the correct approach
as gfortran should use the
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
kargl at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||kargl at gcc dot gnu.org
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #7 from Bill Long ---
Inquiry from the original site:
"Does GCC provide a timeline for when they will conform to F2018?"
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jvdelisle at charter dot net
---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #5 from Bill Long ---
Original customer is asking again...
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
--- Comment #4 from Bill Long ---
The customer has nuclear weapons. They do not do "bounty". :) Cray/HPE is
just the messenger. I think they would be happy with a plan for including the
routine.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=95644
anlauf at gcc dot gnu.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
Summary|IEEE_FMA is missing from|[F2018] IEEE_FMA is missing
18 matches
Mail list logo