In article <45F714B3.3080707@softjar.se>,
Johnny Billquist  <bqt@softjar.se> wrote:
>We really should have GCC always return true for finite() I guess, since 
>that's what the function does anyway, and then gcc could optimize correctly.
>
>But it seems we need someone with knowledge of gcc to fix a number of 
>issues that we have at the moment...
>If just gcc would work right for us, then I think we should actually 
>have a fairly good base at the moment for the VAX.
>

In real.c if (exp == 0) in all the decode_vax_?() functions don't put
anything in the r-> stuff, they just leave it 0'ed. Is that ok?
I understand exp == 0 means really -128, but...

christos