[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What about _FPU_IEEE?
|
From: |
Andreas Jaeger |
|
Subject: |
Re: What about _FPU_IEEE? |
|
Date: |
Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:30:42 +0200 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) XEmacs/21.4 (Academic Rigor) |
"Richard B. Kreckel" <address@hidden> writes:
> Hi,
>
> When trying to port something to Linux/PA I discovered that fpu_control.h
> does not define _FPU_IEEE there. I guess this is because _FPU_DEFAULT is
> just as good there? I need to set __fpu_control to _FPU_IEEE. What is
> the suggested strategy on glibc? Just use _FPU_DEFAULT if _FPU_IEEE is
> not defined? Is this going to give me the expected behaviour on all
> architectures?
You shouldn't use fpu_control.h at all, use the <fenv.h> functions,
those are available for all architectures and most of them are
specified by ISO C99,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs address@hidden
private address@hidden
http://www.suse.de/~aj