hubert.reinterpretcast added a comment. In http://reviews.llvm.org/D15120#336891, @rjmccall wrote:
> > The C committee decided that "undefined behavior" was what they could agree > > on for this sort of case. > > > That's only when the operand value is actually outside of the range of the > type, which for implementations claiming IEEE 754 compatibility means "never" > because of the infinities. Even if it weren't specified, every > implementation I know of in practice does give this defined behavior using > the active FP rounding rules. The applicable wording is quoted here: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15120#310972, but I guess that's unimportant for the purposes this discussion now. > Anyway, I think we're agreed that we should just give make float128_t higher > rank on all platforms. Agreed. Repository: rL LLVM http://reviews.llvm.org/D15120 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
