Real32... optional?

[Wesley W. Terpstra]

The s390 architecture only has 64-bit IEEE registers. Should I remove the Real32 structure and update the regressions appropriately? Or does MLton guarantee the presence of this optional structure?

Otherwise the port was a breeze (all other regressions pass).


_______________________________________________
MLton mailing list
MLton@...
http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton

[Wesley W. Terpstra]

On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 10:20 AM, Wesley W. Terpstra <wesley@...> wrote:

The s390 architecture only has 64-bit IEEE registers. Should I remove the Real32 structure and update the regressions appropriately? Or does MLton guarantee the presence of this optional structure?

Oh, nevermind. It has Real32... just not IEEE floats... nor IEEE doubles.

The table at <http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleitkommazahl#Interne_Darstellung> shows they have more mantissa bits than they should have (and less exponent bits). Blah. Fortunately it seems gcc has software floating point options for this target, which I will enable.


_______________________________________________
MLton mailing list
MLton@...
http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton

[Matthew Fluet-5]

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009, Wesley W. Terpstra wrote:
> The s390 architecture only has 64-bit IEEE registers. Should I remove the
> Real32 structure and update the regressions appropriately? Or does MLton
> guarantee the presence of this optional structure?
>
> Otherwise the port was a breeze (all other regressions pass).

Real32 is definitely desirable on x86 and amd64.  Reconfiguring the basis
library to only sometimes compile and export Real32 would be a major
undertaking.  The platform configurability of the basis library is only on
a very local level.

Using the software floating-point support seems best.

_______________________________________________
MLton mailing list
MLton@...
http://mlton.org/mailman/listinfo/mlton