https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #16 from joseph at codesourcery dot com joseph at codesourcery dot
com ---
That C __builtin_signbit should be type-generic is bug 36757.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Tijl Coosemans tijl at coosemans dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||tijl at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #13 from paolo at gcc dot gnu.org paolo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: paolo
Date: Sun Oct 6 13:44:47 2013
New Revision: 203228
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=203228root=gccview=rev
Log:
2013-10-06 Oleg Endo
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #4 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
Weird that nobody noticed for so much time.
Probably not everybody is practicing the neurotic habit of checking the asm
output for every
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Some builtins are type generic, meaning that you can use just the non-{l,f}
suffixed variant always, but __builtin_signbit isn't among them.
Grep shows that these builtins have type
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #6 from Oleg Endo olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Jakub Jelinek from comment #5)
Some builtins are type generic, meaning that you can use just the non-{l,f}
suffixed variant always, but __builtin_signbit isn't among
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #7 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
I don't think it is a good idea to extend the number of type generic builtins
unless strictly necessary, the overloading in C is quite ugly hack.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #8 from Jakub Jelinek jakub at gcc dot gnu.org ---
That said, I'd say that every conversion to double that would change the sign
looks wrong to me, no matter of what the rounding mode is, except perhaps for
NaN canonicalization and
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
Ok, thanks a lot for the comments. Thus, Oleg, given in particular the last
comment from Jakub, let's just apply to mainline your initial proposed change,
let's leave for now
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #10 from Daniel Krügler daniel.kruegler at googlemail dot com ---
(In reply to Oleg Endo from comment #4)
There's another place in file libstdc++-v3/include/c_std/cmath:
templatetypename _Tp
inline typename
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #11 from Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com ---
At some point, as we discussed already a bit, we should even try to remove
completely the c_std version. For now as I said, let's just leave it alone.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||jakub at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
Paolo Carlini paolo.carlini at oracle dot com changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=58625
--- Comment #3 from Andrew Pinski pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org ---
(In reply to Paolo Carlini from comment #1)
Weird that nobody noticed for so much time. Are there actual testcases for
this? Or in practice it's just an optimization issue, not a
16 matches
Mail list logo
