Re: [Tinycc-devel] x86_64 maintainer, I remind you that long double is still not supported

[Christian Jullien]

Hello Edmund,

I meant that 73_arm64 looks to be arm64 specific which it is not. It is in
fact a pure C code that should work on any architecture. It is clearly
mentioned that this test (a very good and complete test suite IMHO) is there
to specially stress arm64 backend ... but not only.
That why I think '_arm64' is not totally fair.

Christian

-----Original Message-----
From: Tinycc-devel [mailto:address@hidden
On Behalf Of Edmund Grimley Evans
Sent: dimanche 9 octobre 2016 10:06
To: address@hidden
Subject: Re: [Tinycc-devel] x86_64 maintainer, I remind you that long double
is still not supported

Christian Jullien <address@hidden>:

> Part of 73_arm64 test (btw test name is odd), f11 and f21 work well 
> while f31 hangs because of:

> x86_64-gen.c :1359

> // This program is designed to test some arm64-specific things, such 
> as the // calling convention, but should give the same results on any
architecture.

How is the test name odd? Do you just mean it should be "aarch64"
instead of "arm64"?

The comment quoted there explains the purpose of the test. I'm glad it has
helped to reveal some bugs in the x86_64 back end. Perhaps if someone were
to create a new test NN_x86_64 that carefully exercises all the interesting
parts of the x86_64 back end and calling convention then that test would
reveal bugs in other back ends... The things you remember to test do tend to
be the things you didn't forget to implement...

Edmund

_______________________________________________
Tinycc-devel mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel