From: "Joel_S" <jbs30000 DOT news DOT invalid AT web2news DOT net>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: FPU
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2003 22:56:34 +0100
Organization: Web2news.com
Message-ID: <19169N594@web2news.com>
References: <19001N297 AT web2news DOT com> <e8982227 DOT 0303122349 DOT 702cfac3 AT posting DOT google DOT com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.81.26.238
X-Complaints-To: abuse AT web2news DOT net
Lines: 34
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com

> "Joel_S" <jbs30000 DOT news DOT invalid AT web2news DOT net> wrote in
> message news:<19001N297 AT web2news DOT com>...
>> Since DJGPP uses AT&T assembly syntax, then that probably
>> means that FPU
>> commands would be slightly different than Intel syntax.
>> Is there a web
>> site that goes over using FPU commands in DJGPP?
>
> I also interested in references to FPU handling on the same platform
> by different compilers. I recently tested C++ application (MegaPOV)
> with set of compilers: OpenWatcom 1.0, DMC 8.32, DJGPP gcc 3.2,
> Borland 5.51, Borland 6.0, MinGW gcc 3.2. All were compiled and
> started on the same platform - NT4 on Pentium 2. In particular I was
> concerned on simple loop with heavily used doubles to control its
> execution. I noticed that each compiler caused different number of
> iterations (only B5.51==B6.0 which can be expected).
>
> If I write something like
>
>   #define M_PI   3.1415926535897932384626
>   double my_PI = M_PI;
>
> should I expect the same internall bit representation of 'my_PI' on
> the same platform with mentioned compilers or not (considering all
> compilers use the same number of bytes for double) ?
>
> Since it is not DJGPP specific issue (but related) is there any other
> forum where this issue can be continued ?
>
> ABX
I'm not sure.  Sorry.
-- 
Direct access to this group with http://web2news.com
http://web2news.com/?comp.os.msdos.djgpp