Re: [cxx-abi-dev] Clarification on floating point literal mangling

[Dennis Handly <dhandly@xxxxxxxxxx>]

>From: Mark Mitchell <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Mike Herrick wrote:
>> We recently ran across this seeming inconsistency with the
>> description of mangling for floating point literals.  The current
>> wording calls for both "fixed-length" and "without leading zeroes".
>> We think the "without leading zeroes" portion should be removed to
>> match existing practice:

Note: leading zeroes may be important for decimal floating point?

>I suppose that "without leading zeroes" is actually
>technically superior, in that it leads to a more compact mangling in
>some cases

Yes.

>If any of the other implementors (HP, IBM, etc.) do not emit the leading
>zeroes, please speak up!
Mark Mitchell

We do what EDG does but I can't get our version to accept floating point
for templates.
Leading zeroes for integral types is suppressed and converted from octal
to decimal.