From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1645 invoked by alias); 21 Oct 2005 10:26:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 1235 invoked by uid 48); 21 Oct 2005 10:26:19 -0000 Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2005 10:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20051021102619.1234.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug java/24454] GCJ does not correctly support strictfp In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org" X-SW-Source: 2005-10/txt/msg02759.txt.bz2 List-Id: ------- Comment #5 from rmathew at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-10-21 10:26 ------- (In reply to comment #4) > > It would be nice if you could at least indicate what kind > of non-compliance you are talking of here. Is it strictfp, > accuracy of results, rounding of floating-point literals, > or something else? Of course, you should not reproduce > tests verbatim from the JCK, but please provide some > indication of what you're talking about in this bug report. Sorry, I just noticed that aph was the one who changed the summary to lack of strictfp support. So I guess he knows what you were talking about in the bug report. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24454