From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 126685 invoked by alias); 11 Nov 2016 21:16:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 126671 invoked by uid 89); 11 Nov 2016 21:16:24 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=bindings X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2016 21:16:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Carlos O'Donell CC: Florian Weimer , GNU C Library Subject: Re: What to do about libidn? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <44cead16-9db0-a4c0-82cd-1f6178260ed7@redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-ClientProxiedBy: svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) To svr-ies-mbx-01.mgc.mentorg.com (139.181.222.1) X-SW-Source: 2016-11/txt/msg00446.txt.bz2 On Fri, 11 Nov 2016, Carlos O'Donell wrote: > Is libdfp still an add-on? > > It looks like in 2009 they converted to a stand-alone library. > > I reviewed IEEE 754-2008 and found that we do require some DFP support > to fully implement the standard, which means if we did adopt libdfp code > we would do so directly and not as an add-on, so there would be no add-on > requirement there. A language may choose which IEEE formats to support. The C bindings allow an implementation to support IEEE 754 for binary, decimal or both. DFP support in glibc would look rather different from both stand-alone libdfp and add-on libdfp (for example, through integrating DFP support into rather than having separate headers with DFP declarations). -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com