> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009, DJ Delorie wrote:
> > +# Return 1 if the target supports double larger than float,
> > +# 0 otherwise.
> > +
> > +proc check_effective_target_large_double { } {
> > + return [check_no_compiler_messages large_double object {
> > + int dummy[sizeof(double) < sizeof(float) ? 1 : -1];
> > + }]
>
> Isn't that comparison reversed?
Yes, yes it is. After the first funny test case (which I reported
earlier), I double checked every test I put in. This one got left in
the "reversed" test state. Fixed.
