From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2314 invoked by alias); 30 Jan 2003 22:57:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 2284 invoked from network); 30 Jan 2003 22:57:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mx2.redhat.com) (12.150.115.133) by 172.16.49.205 with SMTP; 30 Jan 2003 22:57:26 -0000 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0UMpe112456; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:51:40 -0500 Received: from potter.sfbay.redhat.com (potter.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.27.15]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0UMvLn14636; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 17:57:21 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (frothingslosh.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.27]) by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0UMvKw17344; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:57:20 -0800 Received: (from rth@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0UMvKZ23156; Thu, 30 Jan 2003 14:57:20 -0800 X-Authentication-Warning: localhost.localdomain: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 23:49:00 -0000 From: Richard Henderson To: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" Cc: aoliva@redhat.com, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, oldham@codesourcery.com, ro@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE Subject: Re: Irix6 native long double libcalls progress report (and problem) Message-ID: <20030130225720.GC23099@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson , "Kaveh R. Ghazi" , aoliva@redhat.com, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, gcc@gcc.gnu.org, libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org, oldham@codesourcery.com, ro@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE References: <200301280219.VAA24441@caip.rutgers.edu> <200301281710.MAA00143@caip.rutgers.edu> <200301281731.MAA04631@caip.rutgers.edu> <15926.49701.3!59482.666471@xayide.TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE> <200301290132.UAA12941@caip.rutgers.edu> <20030129072657.GB20774@redhat.com> <200301291615.LAA13184@caip.rutgers.edu> <20030129170727.GB21507@redhat.com> <200301302151.QAA12389@caip.rutgers.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200301302151.QAA12389@caip.rutgers.edu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-SW-Source: 2003-01/txt/msg01682.txt.bz2 On Thu, Jan 30, 2003 at 04:51:45PM -0500, Kaveh R. Ghazi wrote: > 43f0000000000000 bff0000000000000 > 43efffffffffffff 409ffc0000000000 Hmm. They seem to be doing some of what Alex proposed a while ago -- making use of the sign bit. Theirs is (2**64, -1), ours is (0xfffffffffffff800, 0x7ff). > But the bit patterns are different! And I'm guessing that this > confuses the gcc comparison function. Almost certainly. As for using SGI's comparison routines, you can do that from expanders in the backend, with direct calls to emit_library_call etc. That's what I do for Tru64's long double library. r~