On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, James Greenhalgh wrote: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_STANDARD: > + case EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT: > + /* Otherwise, the excess precision we want when we are > + in a standards compliant mode, and the implicit precision we > + provide can be identical. */ > + return FLT_EVAL_METHOD_PROMOTE_TO_DOUBLE;
That's wrong for EXCESS_PRECISION_TYPE_IMPLICIT. There is no implicit promotion in the back end (and really there shouldn't be any excess precision here at all, and double_t in glibc should be fixed along with a GCC change to remove this mistake). -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
