X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f
X-Sybari-Space:	00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
From:	Martin Stromberg <Martin DOT Stromberg AT epl DOT ericsson DOT se>
Message-Id:	<200309301525.RAA10153@lws256.lu.erisoft.se>
Subject:	Re: K. B. Williams's comparison macros [PATCH]
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date:	Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:25:50 +0200 (MET DST)
In-Reply-To:	<1e4.10a8dd0f.2caaed7f@aol.com> from "Kbwms@aol.com" at Sep 30, 2003 10:30:23 AM
X-Mailer:	ELM [version 2.5 PL3]
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

> In a message dated 9/30/2003 9:00:40 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
> Martin DOT Stromberg AT epl DOT ericsson DOT se writes:
> 
> > >+#define   isgreater(x,y)     __builtin_isgreater(x,y)
> > >+#define   isgreaterequal(x,y)   __builtin_isgreaterequal(x,y)
> > ...
> > 
> > I'm not sure but this doesn't look to me like an implementation but a
> > definite not implemented here.
> > 
> 
> These macros satisfy requirements of C99 and are described in the info file 
> for GCC as follows:
> 
>    GCC provides built-in versions of the ISO C99 floating point
> comparison macros that avoid raising exceptions for unordered operands.
> They have the same names as the standard macros ( `isgreater',
> `isgreaterequal', `isless', `islessequal', `islessgreater', and
> `isunordered') , with `__builtin_' prefixed.  We intend for a library
> implementor to be able to simply `#define' each standard macro to its
> built-in equivalent.

That's nice. And how about gcc 2.95 that existed before C99?


Right,

						MartinS

- Raw text -