From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hamza.pair.com (hamza.pair.com [209.68.5.143]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB1743857802; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 14:50:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org CB1743857802 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=pfeifer.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pfeifer.com Received: from hamza.pair.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7191533E96; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:50:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.49] (unknown [154.236.181.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by hamza.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B36CA33E95; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:50:51 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 16:50:48 +0200 (CEST) From: Gerald Pfeifer To: Tobias Burnus cc: Sandra Loosemore , Andreas Tobler , fortran@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: [PATCH, Fortran] Revert to non-multilib-specific ISO_Fortran_binding.h In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <2de2f2b0-d221-acc1-79d4-554ee480c62@pfeifer.com> References: <4c32e0e7-7156-835a-30b-ada8c4b4482d@pfeifer.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, KAM_DMARC_STATUS, KAM_LOTSOFHASH, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Gcc-patches mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 14:51:00 -0000 On Mon, 13 Sep 2021, Tobias Burnus wrote: > Can you run 'echo | cpp -E -g3|grep DBL' to (or in the build dir: echo | > ./gcc/cc1 -E -g3 -dD|grep DBL) to check what's the output? Thank you, Tobias, and I'm just testing the proposed patch, but still wanted to follow up on your question: % echo | ./gcc/cc1 -E -g3 -dD | grep DBL #define __DBL_MANT_DIG__ 53 #define __DBL_DIG__ 15 #define __DBL_MIN_EXP__ (-1021) #define __DBL_MIN_10_EXP__ (-307) #define __DBL_MAX_EXP__ 1024 #define __DBL_MAX_10_EXP__ 308 #define __DBL_DECIMAL_DIG__ 17 #define __DBL_MAX__ ((double)1.79769313486231570814527423731704357e+308L) #define __DBL_NORM_MAX__ ((double)1.79769313486231570814527423731704357e+308L) #define __DBL_MIN__ ((double)2.22507385850720138309023271733240406e-308L) #define __DBL_EPSILON__ ((double)2.22044604925031308084726333618164062e-16L) #define __DBL_DENORM_MIN__ ((double)4.94065645841246544176568792868221372e-324L) #define __DBL_HAS_DENORM__ 1 #define __DBL_HAS_INFINITY__ 1 #define __DBL_HAS_QUIET_NAN__ 1 #define __DBL_IS_IEC_60559__ 2 #define __LDBL_MANT_DIG__ 53 #define __LDBL_DIG__ 15 #define __LDBL_MIN_EXP__ (-16381) #define __LDBL_MIN_10_EXP__ (-4931) #define __LDBL_MAX_EXP__ 16384 #define __LDBL_MAX_10_EXP__ 4932 #define __LDBL_DECIMAL_DIG__ 17 #define __LDBL_MAX__ 1.18973149535723163299902939989638351e+4932L #define __LDBL_NORM_MAX__ 1.18973149535723163299902939989638351e+4932L #define __LDBL_MIN__ 3.36210314311209350626267781732175260e-4932L #define __LDBL_EPSILON__ 2.22044604925031308084726333618164062e-16L #define __LDBL_DENORM_MIN__ 7.46536864129530798597817535205257178e-4948L #define __LDBL_HAS_DENORM__ 1 #define __LDBL_HAS_INFINITY__ 1 #define __LDBL_HAS_QUIET_NAN__ 1 #define __LDBL_IS_IEC_60559__ 2 Gerald