Re: newlib ieeefp.h again

[Joel Sherrill <joel dot sherrill at oarcorp dot 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