delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Thu, 20 Mar 2003 13:02:30 +0200 (EET) |
From: | Esa A E Peuha <peuha AT cc DOT helsinki DOT fi> |
Sender: | peuha AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Subject: | Re: strto{d,f,ld}, inf and nan patch |
In-Reply-To: | <7263-Wed19Mar2003175704+0200-eliz@elta.co.il> |
Message-ID: | <Pine.OSF.4.51.0303201255060.3139@sirppi.helsinki.fi> |
References: | <200303182003 DOT h2IK3aw16734 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se> |
<3E786DE4 DOT CEDBE28C AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <7263-Wed19Mar2003175704+0200-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> | |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Wed, 19 Mar 2003, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I'd rather we had the C99 math functions in libc.a. What libm.a has > is mostly for historical reasons, and we developed our versions of > most of that stuff for libc.a (Eric's work) to free users from the > need to say -lm. It doesn't make much sense to put that limitation > now when users want the new C99 math stuff: there's no history > involved, so we can do whatever we see fit. I agree that libc.a should have all C99 math functions, but I think it might make sense to have different version of these functions in libm.a; that's the case for the functions that are currently in both libc.a and libm.a (in fact, that's the reason we still have libm.a IIRC). -- Esa Peuha student of mathematics at the University of Helsinki http://www.helsinki.fi/~peuha/
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |