Re: standards/52819: a64l should sign-extend its result when long has more than 32 bit

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

The following reply was made to PR standards/52819; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
To: gnats-bugs%NetBSD.org@localhost
Cc: 
Subject: Re: standards/52819: a64l should sign-extend its result when long has more than 32 bit
Date: Fri, 15 Dec 2017 11:08:55 +0700

     Date:        Thu, 14 Dec 2017 18:35:01 +0000 (UTC)
     From:        Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>
     Message-ID:  <20171214183501.7A25F7A1EA%mollari.NetBSD.org@localhost>
 
   |  Since only positive values are
   |  ever ended,
 
 I wish my email spell checker was also a mind reader... s/ended/needed/
 (I cannot imagine how I managed to type that!)
 
   |  I will ask the austin group for a ruling on this though.
 
 I have done that - but only informally so far (an e-mail request.)
 No meaningful response yet.
 
 If it looks to be needed, I will submit a formal "clarification requested"
 defect report, but if that is required it might take until sometime
 in 2019 before there's any real action (that's the current delay on
 processing these issues...)
 
 In the meantime, it would be useful if someone (Daniel ... hint hint...)
 were to create an ATF test for this case with the interpretation from
 the PR as the expected output, and then mark it as expected to fail,
 citing this PR (and simply to be skipped on 32 bit long systems.)
 
 Then after the PR is dealt with, we either change libc in which case the
 test will stop failing, or we change the test to expect the alternative
 (current) libc result, in which case it will also stop failing.
 
 kre