public inbox for newlib@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joel Sherrill <joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com>
To: Craig Howland <howland@LGSInnovations.com>,
	"newlib@sourceware.org" <newlib@sourceware.org>
Subject: Re: newlib ieeefp.h again
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2017 21:03:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <0b29f34d-7e7d-801f-5905-2c54dde43a40@oarcorp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f73014e6-c4e3-132c-8225-a2f4dad4d178@LGSInnovations.com>



On 3/23/2017 3:59 PM, Craig Howland wrote:
>
>
> On 03/23/2017 04:23 PM, Joel Sherrill wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 3/23/2017 3:05 PM, Craig Howland wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 03/23/2017 02:58 AM, Sebastian Huber wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> I would move the _LDBL_EQ_DBL definition to <ieeefp.h> based on compiler
>>>> provided defines.
>>>>
>>> The primary question is whether this is truly possible or not, which will depend
>>> upon both what compiler and how old of a compiler version newlib wants to
>>> support.  Back in 2009 when _LDBL_EQ_DBL was added to newlib.hin, this was not
>>> really possible as both float.h and compiler predefines were spotty.  As long as
>>> we don't need to go back too many versions, it ought to be fine to do it at
>>> build time now.
>>
>> The common answer to this type of question is to say that if they
>> are using old versions of gcc, they can also use old versions of
>> newlib.
>>
>> If this is not an issue as recently as gcc say 4.4 or 4.5, that
>> is still very old. Do you recall a gcc version which couldn't be
>> detected at build time?
>>
>> --joel
> At that time, I think I was using GCC 4.1 and 2.95 (both PowerPC cross
> compiler--vendor toolsets mostly took pretty long to update versions back then).
>

That is very old. I was basing my "it's too old" on what was
included with RHEL/CentOS 6 and both of those are WAY older
than that.

Just my opinion but I don't see a need to worry about compilers
that old. 2.95 didn't even have c99 and I think the C++ was
pre-standardization. 4.1.2 was released in Feb 2007 so that's
over a decade old since the last release on the branch. I
think we can move along now. :)

It would be nice to hear from Corinna and Jeff though.

--joel

  reply	other threads:[~2017-03-23 21:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-03-22 23:17 Andrew Johnson
2017-03-23  6:59 ` Sebastian Huber
2017-03-23 16:19   ` Andrew Johnson
2017-03-23 20:05   ` Craig Howland
2017-03-23 20:23     ` Joel Sherrill
2017-03-23 20:59       ` Craig Howland
2017-03-23 21:03         ` Joel Sherrill [this message]
2017-03-24  6:05     ` Sebastian Huber
2017-03-24 15:46       ` Craig Howland

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=0b29f34d-7e7d-801f-5905-2c54dde43a40@oarcorp.com \
    --to=joel.sherrill@oarcorp.com \
    --cc=howland@LGSInnovations.com \
    --cc=newlib@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).