<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I'm still ticked that many languages and compilers dropped support for
80 bit long doubles on x86 in the 90's because non-x86 CPUs didn't have
it.<br>
<br>
Don Clugston wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:bf719cc41001280508u3bccacf1m145a2201b30e5e46@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">2010/1/28 Steve Schveighoffer <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:schveiguy@yahoo.com"><schveiguy@yahoo.com></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">By that logic, shared arrays must be usable on 32-bit systems and not on 64 bit. I think this is a huge portability issue, and an unacceptable inconsistency.
Reals are not the same however, there the capabilities of the processor are specifically targeted.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Agreed. The IEEE describes 80-bit extended real as a non-interchange
format. I think it's perfectly acceptable to make its sharing
behaviour processor-specific. (It could be defined as an ABI issue).
In general, 'real' does not support atomic operations -- certainly not
for SPARC 128-bit reals, which are implemented via hardware
interrupts.
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>