On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 03:35:30PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 2 January 2011 15:05, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 02:04:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> Could we have a target-specific "silence this SNaN" function?
> >
> > You mean a target-specific version of floatX
On 2 January 2011 15:05, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 02:04:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> Could we have a target-specific "silence this SNaN" function?
>
> You mean a target-specific version of floatXX_maybe_silence_nan()?
Actually what I had in mind was a target-specific
On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 at 02:04:11PM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 2 January 2011 13:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:51:17AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> >> IEEE754 doesn't specify precisely what NaN should be returned as
> >> the result of an operation on two input NaNs
On 2 January 2011 13:23, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:51:17AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
>> IEEE754 doesn't specify precisely what NaN should be returned as
>> the result of an operation on two input NaNs. This is therefore
>> target-specific. Abstract out the code in propag
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 11:51:17AM +, Peter Maydell wrote:
> IEEE754 doesn't specify precisely what NaN should be returned as
> the result of an operation on two input NaNs. This is therefore
> target-specific. Abstract out the code in propagateFloat*NaN()
> which was implementing the x87 propa
IEEE754 doesn't specify precisely what NaN should be returned as
the result of an operation on two input NaNs. This is therefore
target-specific. Abstract out the code in propagateFloat*NaN()
which was implementing the x87 propagation rules, so that it
can be easily replaced on a per-target basis.
