Displaying 1 result from an estimated 1 matches for "ci32".
Did you mean:
c32
2019 Jul 02
2
RFC: Complex in LLVM
> Why? I'd prefer we avoid introducing even more special cases. Is there
> any reason why we should not define "complex <scalar type>", or to be
> more restrictive, "complex <floating-point type>"? I really don't like
> the idea of excluding 128-bit complex types, and I think that we can
> have a generic facility.
Hal, we had 128-bit