X-pop3-spooler: POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 3 961213 -bs-
Delivered-To: pcg AT goof DOT com
Message-ID: <19980314021923.32075@cerebro.laendle>
Date: Sat, 14 Mar 1998 02:19:23 +0100
From: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
To: Thomas Koehler <T DOT Koehler AT pfh DOT research DOT philips DOT com>
Cc: beastium <beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl>
Subject: Re: paranoia & extra precision [was -fno-float-store in pgcc]
References: <Pine DOT SOL DOT 3 DOT 96 DOT 980313133308 DOT 249A-100000 AT stekt10> <35094C21 DOT 6B3F0566 AT pfh DOT research DOT philips DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Mailer: Mutt 0.88
In-Reply-To: <35094C21.6B3F0566@pfh.research.philips.com>; from Thomas Koehler on Fri, Mar 13, 1998 at 04:09:21PM +0100
X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.1.85 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version pgcc-2.91.06 980129 (gcc-2.8.0 release)) 
Status: RO
Content-Length: 885
Lines: 18

On Fri, Mar 13, 1998 at 04:09:21PM +0100, Thomas Koehler wrote:

> so what is the difference between the behaviour of programs compiled
> with -ffloat-store compared to setting the FPU-rounding mode to double
> via __setfpucw? (except that the -ffloat-store variante is much slower).

you can still program ansi c.

with setfpucw, you have to store the cw on almost every fpu operation.
gcc already does this for integer concersions (for other reasons).

      -----==-                                              |
      ----==-- _                                            |
      ---==---(_)__  __ ____  __       Marc Lehmann       +--
      --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /       pcg AT goof DOT com       |e|
      -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\                          --+
    The choice of a GNU generation                        |
                                                          |