From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <libc-alpha-return-93292-listarch-libc-alpha=sources.redhat.com@sourceware.org>
Received: (qmail 14524 invoked by alias); 15 Jun 2018 20:20:02 -0000
Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <libc-alpha.sourceware.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:libc-alpha-subscribe@sourceware.org>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/>
List-Post: <mailto:libc-alpha@sourceware.org>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org
Received: (qmail 14501 invoked by uid 89); 15 Jun 2018 20:20:01 -0000
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=
X-HELO: mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com
From: Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@linux.ibm.com>
To: Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] ldbl-128ibm-compat: Add a generic significand() implementation
In-Reply-To: <87wouzbyd6.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
References: <20180606223909.16675-1-tuliom@linux.ibm.com> <20180606223909.16675-5-tuliom@linux.ibm.com> <alpine.DEB.2.20.1806071325120.27583@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <87wouzbyd6.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.25 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/25.3.1 (x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu)
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2018 20:20:00 -0000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00
x-cbid: 18061520-0036-0000-0000-000009FF1323
X-IBM-SpamModules-Scores: 
X-IBM-SpamModules-Versions: BY=3.00009197; HX=3.00000241; KW=3.00000007;
 PH=3.00000004; SC=3.00000265; SDB=6.01047468; UDB=6.00536547; IPR=6.00826441;
 MB=3.00021672; MTD=3.00000008; XFM=3.00000015; UTC=2018-06-15 20:19:58
X-IBM-AV-DETECTION: SAVI=unused REMOTE=unused XFE=unused
x-cbparentid: 18061520-0037-0000-0000-000047C1889A
Message-Id: <87tvq3by52.fsf@linux.ibm.com>
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:,, definitions=2018-06-15_11:,,
 signatures=0
X-SW-Source: 2018-06/txt/msg00446.txt.bz2

Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@linux.ibm.com> writes:

> Joseph Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho wrote:
>>
>> For w_scalb you'd need to 
>> treat the existing w_scalb*_compat templates like the other compat ones - 
>
> I didn't follow completely your proposal here.
> Are you saying that ldbl-128ibm-compat also needs a w_scalbf128_compat?

Sorry.  I hit send too soon.
Please ignore this question.  :-D

-- 
Tulio Magno