From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id 29BA13858C50; Thu, 26 Jan 2023 01:12:17 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 29BA13858C50 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1674695537; bh=wOtSAwpiNlPN9L2+P39sVs+DzFc9pMr7GX6VfEBfT6s=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=oBVPlNthYHLQXzYrW6Y2vwheDVrRg4HJUvVmk+K1yPPiJ0gr+xHmYHcTlcCt9DE8N TVZWPYa/t2osSnzmAr4OjfG0ygGSixM8c/PE9IkxlParr64UR6M0IxVvG+9vqvUN9M DTL4dRXBQZv4CtYJZbcQ6Qeb4+QaE/44xgkyB1So= From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c/108531] Imaginary types are not supported, violating ISO C Annex G Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2023 01:12:16 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.2.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 List-Id: https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D108531 --- Comment #6 from joseph at codesourcery dot com --- My only real addition to my previous comments in the referenced glibc bug=20 report is that, given we defined _Float32 which has the same "not promoted= =20 at language level in variable arguments" property as _Imaginary float and=20 let it have the ABI arising naturally from the back ends in the absence of= =20 target maintainers / ABI maintainers choosing something different, it=20 would probably be reasonable to do the same thing for imaginary types;=20 this case is rather different from _BitInt where there are significant ABI= =20 choices to be made for each architecture (and I've filed bugs on various=20 ABI repositories to request that such ABIs be defined). It would be good=20 if psABI maintainers kept up more with C standard features, however.=