checks involving LDBL_MANT_DIG

checks involving LDBL_MANT_DIG

[writeonce]

Greetings,

In src/complex/*, several files check for LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53 &&
LDBL_MAX_EXP == 1024, however according to src/stdio/vfprintf.c,
(LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53) is considered incorrect and would cause a
compile-time error.  Does this mean that the above checks in
src/complex/* may be eliminated?

zg

Re: checks involving LDBL_MANT_DIG

[Szabolcs Nagy]

* writeonce@midipix.org <writeonce@midipix.org> [2014-05-27 07:23:20 -0700]:
> In src/complex/*, several files check for LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53 &&
> LDBL_MAX_EXP == 1024, however according to src/stdio/vfprintf.c,
> (LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53) is considered incorrect and would cause a
> compile-time error.  Does this mean that the above checks in
> src/complex/* may be eliminated?

there is nothing wrong with LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53

vfprintf only checks if long double really has appropriate size in that case

Re: checks involving LDBL_MANT_DIG

[writeonce]

On 05/27/2014 06:00 PM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * writeonce@midipix.org <writeonce@midipix.org> [2014-05-27 07:23:20 -0700]:
>> In src/complex/*, several files check for LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53 &&
>> LDBL_MAX_EXP == 1024, however according to src/stdio/vfprintf.c,
>> (LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53) is considered incorrect and would cause a
>> compile-time error.  Does this mean that the above checks in
>> src/complex/* may be eliminated?
> there is nothing wrong with LDBL_MANT_DIG == 53
>
> vfprintf only checks if long double really has appropriate size in that case
>
>
Thanks, that explains everything... wrong experiment on my part.
zg