Date:	Sat, 30 Aug 2003 12:07:21 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com>
Message-Id:	<2593-Sat30Aug2003120721+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<3F4FCD2D.5070204@cyberoptics.com> (message from Eric Rudd on
	Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:01:17 -0500)
Subject:	Re: Arithmetic Exceptions in C99
References:	<200308292046 DOT h7TKkAEJ012781 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> <3F4FC482 DOT A71D96A1 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <3F4FCD2D DOT 5070204 AT cyberoptics DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2003 17:01:17 -0500
> From: Eric Rudd <rudd AT cyberoptics DOT com>
> 
> I am still of the opinion that it is 
> best to prevent the math functions from either raising signals or 
> setting exception bits in the FPU status register, because they can 
> crash a program and prevent recovery.

We could implement the exceptions bitmap as a special word that is
physically different from the x87 status register.  The functions that
return the exceptions info could then look at that word and also at
the x87 status word.

Would that be okay?

- Raw text -