On Friday, 30 June 2017 at 10:58:50 UTC, ixid wrote:
On Friday, 30 June 2017 at 10:49:19 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Friday, 30 June 2017 at 10:44:41 UTC, ixid wrote:
On Friday, 30 June 2017 at 10:26:03 UTC, Nicholas Wilson
wrote:
On Friday, 30 June 2017 at 10:07:44 UTC, ixid wrote:
Are there any reasons not to put real on the path to
removal? The hardware is deprecated by both Intel and AMD
and it seems like an unnecessary source of confusion.
Don't forget that real is only fp80 on x86. On AArch64(?) it
is/should be fp128 which _is_ supported, there is also
PowerPC double double.
Isn't it an objective of D to move away from such confusing
types and have defined widths?
D does have well defined floating point types.
float and double.
real is a special type for people who know what they are dong.
And not to be removed.
In that case should it not be defined to be something other
than 80 bit doubles on x86?
The real type is defined as the highest precision a platform
gives.
This is the legacy x87 format on x86 platform. If ever AMD or
Intel introduced a 128bit SSEx format, real would be changed to
use this hypothetical new format.
