pengfei added inline comments.
================
Comment at: clang/test/Sema/x86-no-x87.c:48-61
+void assign2() {
+ struct st_long_double st;
+#ifndef NOERROR
+ // expected-error@+2{{long double is not supported on this target}}
+#endif
+ st.ld = 0.42;
+}
----------------
asavonic wrote:
> pengfei wrote:
> > These seems pass with GCC. https://godbolt.org/z/qM4nWhThx
> Right. Assignment of a literal is compiled to just `mov` without any x87
> instructions, so it is not diagnosed by GCC. On the other hand, assignment of
> a variable does trigger the error:
>
> void assign4(double d) {
> struct st_long_double st;
> st.ld = d; // error: long double is not supported on this target
> }
>
> We can update the patch to do the same for some cases, but it does not look
> very consistent, and makes assumptions on how the code is optimized and
> compiled.
>
> GCC has an advantage here, because it emits the diagnostic at a lower level
> after at lease some optimizations are done. For example, the following code
> does not trigger an error for GCC because of inlining:
>
> double get_const() {
> return 0.42;
> }
> void assign5(struct st_long_double *st) {
> st->ld = get_const();
> }
>
I see. Another concern is about the 32 bits. @LiuChen3 had tested in D100091
that GCC doesn't error for 32 bits. Do we need to consider it here?
Repository:
rG LLVM Github Monorepo
CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98895/new/
https://reviews.llvm.org/D98895
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
