Path: g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!nx02.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!213.200.89.86.MISMATCH!news1.as3257.net!feeder.erje.net!feeder2.ecngs.de!ecngs!feeder.ecngs.de!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.ams.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 16:03:03 -0500
From: "Scouser" <sco...@scouse-no-spam.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,de.comp.lang.c,comp.std.c
References: <ZNmdnQ1E8YWoHSjRnZ2dnUVZ5omdnZ2d@giganews.com> <i948ma$f3u$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com> <uJOdnQiUIO6P8yrRnZ2dnUVZ5hudnZ2d@giganews.com> <ln8w20a1zr.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <roudnfYzLIcPQCXRnZ2dnUVZ5jednZ2d@giganews.com> <i9b0hj$rde$1@news.eternal-september.org> <x7OdnaocAv3UNCHRnZ2dnUVZ5s-dnZ2d@giganews.com> <i9iu3f$kdo$1@news.eternal-september.org> <R-2dnQLLuKng5CDRnZ2dnUVZ5radnZ2d@giganews.com> <7c7b98c2-f08d-4238-87fc-da7f5036d770@n40g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <RfKdnTBCecZ56iPRnZ2dnUVZ5sudnZ2d@giganews.com> <i9mekf$ecu$1@news.eternal-september.org>
Subject: Re: standard pragma's II
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2010 22:04:14 +0100
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5994
Message-ID: <qtadnW0FrYuaFVHRnZ2dnUVZ8mSdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 49
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-PUAZlvJcNHVF6C5mRgi9ssmk/Iv4pem6U2BGJPeKwJxcnxXbiwdZpMNaEeSWBEm/8cy6Sc2AXlBHnDc!nB3dB7Y74ebYKWhcrxgtTcWAliER4GDfzqhoaUUNbc4zhpDrgVtp+GN/E66iVhI2ylNVF6bwYM8g!iwQ3yR30CrN+vYvGFy9ro/4Cqg==
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3553

"James Kuyper" <jameskuy...@verizon.net> wrote in message 
news:i9mekf$ecu$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> On 10/20/2010 01:02 AM, John Smith wrote:
>> William Hughes wrote:
>>
>>> It does not of course. However, historically, floating point was of
>>> secondary
>>> importance to C implementations, nor was exact agreement valued above
>>> speed and
>>> ease of implementation in the standardization process (this does not
>>> apply
>>> only to floating point, condsider % and negative values). Thus if
>>> exact agreement
>>> and/or corner cases matter, C floating point support (at least
>>> portable support)
>>> is generally insufficient. C99 has gone a long way to correcting
>>> this,
>>
>> If that's true, then I don't understand why the word "Broken" occurs so
>> much here:
>>
>> http://gcc.gnu.org/gcc-3.1/c99status.html
>
> Why are you looking at an old version of gcc? That same page contains a 
> prominent link to the status page for mainline gcc
> <http://gcc.gnu.org/c99status.html>. There are version-specific status 
> pages for versions up to 4.5, so 3.1 is pretty old.
>
> There's not a single Feature marked as "Broken" in mainline gcc.
>
> Only a few features remain that are completely missing; two of which are 
> relevant to floating point: the very same standard pragmas that are the 
> subject of this thread, and math_errhandling.
>
> There's a number of library issues remaining, but the only ones that 
> affect floating point involve <tgmath.h>, math_errhandling, and printing 
> of floating point values with "%lf".
>
> If I understand the "Further notes" correctly, gcc conforms to IEC 60559, 
> if the hardware it's compiling for does so, but it chooses not to 
> predefine __STDC_IEC_559__. It seems to me that gcc could predefine it, 
> only when compiling for such hardware, but maybe that's more difficult to 
> do than I naively imagine?

They do that though, don't they?

Scouser