Re: [MiNT] gcc 2.95.3:specs

[Peter Slegg <p.slegg@scubadivers.co.uk>]

On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 23:16:07 , Vincent Rivière <vincent.riviere@freesbee.fr> wrote:
> Helmut Karlowski wrote:
> > Or is there a reason for always using m68020?
>
> It seems that the default GCC defines were a big mess in older versions.
> I think that ideally, we should keep the standard, unpatched behavior. Bu
> t
> when there are bugs, they must be fixed...
>
I wonder if this was done to return floats in fp0 or doesn't it work
that way ?

Regards,

Peter