From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 32501 invoked by alias); 13 Jun 2006 15:51:53 -0000 Received: (qmail 32491 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jun 2006 15:51:50 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from ausmtp06.au.ibm.com (HELO ausmtp06.au.ibm.com) (202.81.18.155) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:51:48 +0000 Received: from sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (d23rh904.au.ibm.com [202.81.18.202]) by ausmtp06.au.ibm.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k5DFraPP2506858 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:53:36 +1000 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (d23av04.au.ibm.com [9.190.250.237]) by sd0208e0.au.ibm.com (8.12.10/NCO/VER6.8) with ESMTP id k5DFssIc236606 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:54:54 +1000 Received: from d23av04.au.ibm.com (loopback [127.0.0.1]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.13.3) with ESMTP id k5DFpWe8028270 for ; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:51:33 +1000 Received: from sig-9-65-109-166.mts.ibm.com (sig-9-65-109-166.mts.ibm.com [9.65.109.166]) by d23av04.au.ibm.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k5DFpS1T028081; Wed, 14 Jun 2006 01:51:31 +1000 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 15:51:00 -0000 From: Wu Zhou To: drow@false.org cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: About decimal floating point support Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2006-06/txt/msg00187.txt.bz2 Hi Daniel, We ever talked about adding decimal floating point into GDB. And you provided a lot insightful suggestion for my first patch. In my post at 2005-10-18: http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-10/msg00148.html http://sources.redhat.com/ml/gdb-patches/2005-10/msg00149.html I revised the patch and the testcase. I believe it can address most of your concern. But there is one concern not addressed: you ever proposed to move libdecnumber to the top level of the repository, and use that to implement DFP support in GDB. At that time (Oct, 2005), DFP support for gcc is not matured yet. The libdecnumber code may change itself. So I didn't bother to adopt you method at that time and put my focus on resolving other problem you pointed out. Now since DFP is already in the 4.2 development tree of gcc. So I guess it is time to revist this. What is your current thought about this? Do you still think it is more feasible to put libdecnumber at the top level repository? I am now considering copy the code of libdecnumber (which is at the top level of gcc repository) to the top level of gdb repository. and use that to re-implment DFP support. If the code of libdecnumber is changed, we can synchronize that to gdb repository. Then gdb developers don't need to maintain these sensitive numeric code. What do you think on this? Your comments are highly appreciated! Regards - Wu Zhou