On 2/4/22 4:26 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote: > As I said before, I didn't even read the patch, just the one line > summary was enough for a NAK. If the patch in fact does something else, > then it is still incorrect, and needs a very different subject and > summary. > > I hope you see how "using the default of the underlying system" is > questionable in itself, but is something completely different from using > the default of the build compiler, which makes even less sense. > > You want a configure flag to set the default long double format to be > IEEE QP. This cannot be enabled by default until a (big) majority of > systems "in the wild" will work with that (only on powerpc64le-linux > or some *big* thing like that is fine, only default it to enabled there > then). At that point in time, configure shouls complain, and the user > would have to explicitly *disable* it to build without that support.
Can you please clarify one thing for me. Do you think it's possible that we can come up with some type of configure patch that automatically sets the long double default given something on the system we can test for or do you think that's impossible and we'll just have to live with explicitly using a configure option to set the default? ...at least until some time in the far future when enough systems/distros have changed to IEEE128 that we can change the default without a test. Peter
