On 02/16/2012 02:42 PM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2012-02-15 15:18:45 +0000, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 02/15/2012 09:30 AM, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> >> But to be absolutely clear, glibc's libm doesn't have a problem
> >> meeting C99, AFAIK.
> > That's not quite correct. It is completely broken in directed
> > rounding modes (up to crashes).
>
> Eh? C99 doesn't require directed rounding modes. I'll grant you,
> if they are provided they shouldn't crash. :-)
C99 doesn't require directed rounding modes, but as long as they
are claimed to be supported by<fenv.h>, they should work:
Ah, I see. So, we could bring gcc+glibc into compliance by not
defining the rounding mode macros.
Andrew.
