This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Simplify HUGE_VAL definitions [committed]


On Fri, 1 Sep 2017, Zack Weinberg wrote:

> One more problem, which I should have thought to check earlier: 1e10000L
> isn't big enough if long double is 128 bits wide (which it actually
> appears to be on this computer):

1e10000L is big enough.  For both x86 extended and binary128, the largest 
finite value is just below 2^16384 (about 1.2e4932).

It's true that it wouldn't be enough for _Float128x (which must have a 
precision of at least 128 bits and maximum exponent at least 65535; e.g. 
binary192 would meet those requirements, binary160 wouldn't; GCC does not 
support _Float128x, or any such format, on any target).  But if we 
supported such types I don't expect we'd have a HUGE_VAL fallback for them 
any more than we do for HUGE_VAL_F128.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]