On Thursday, 3 July 2014 at 14:26:51 UTC, Iain Buclaw via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
It's also a handy coincidence that for many platforms the
targets
largest supported FP and *double* type happen to be the same
too.
Out of curiosity, how is C "long double" interpreted on those
platforms? Just doesn't exist, or is interpreted as the same as
double?
What's concerning me here is that you've posted at least one
example platform where the C long double is _not_ the same as the
largest FP type.
Now, it makes sense to me that the spec _could_ be, "real ==
largest hardware-supported FP type", and it makes sense that the
spec could be, "real == C long double for the platform". But it
seems quite apparent that it can't mean both, and that there
needs to be a firm decision about which we want it to be.
