[LLVMdev] ConstantFoldBinaryFP and cross compilation

[Hal Finkel]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nick Lewycky" <nicholas at mxc.ca>
> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu
> Sent: Saturday, April 27, 2013 1:26:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] ConstantFoldBinaryFP and cross compilation
> 
> On 04/26/2013 04:20 PM, Owen Anderson wrote:
> >
> > On Apr 26, 2013, at 3:07 PM, Sergei Larin <slarin at codeaurora.org
> > <mailto:slarin at codeaurora.org>> wrote:
> >
> >> Dan,
> >> Thank you for the quick and throughout reply. First paragraph
> >> pretty
> >> much sums it up. Unless there is more will to guaranty (or provide
> >> under flag) stricter version of IEEE adherence, I doubt much can
> >> be done.
> >> So all of you with picky customers out thereJIs there anyone else
> >> that
> >> would be concerned about this problem in any of it potential
> >> forms?
> >
> > I have the opposite problem. I have customers who call libm
> > functions
> > with constants (or their LLVM intrinsic equivalents) are get very
> > angry
> > if they don't get constant folded, and they're not picky at all
> > about
> > the precision.
> 
> I just want LLVM to behave the same on whatever platform it's run on.
> People already accept that depending on iteration order is a bug, but
> it's been harder to get people to accept that llvm needs bit-exact
> floating point constant folding, especially given the implementation
> difficulty.

I also think this is something for which we should aim; someone just needs to do the implementation work so that we have our own configurable-precision sin, cos, etc. What else needs to be done?

 -Hal

> 
> Nick
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>