delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
X-Authentication-Warning: | delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-workers-bounces using -f |
X-Recipient: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
DKIM-Signature: | v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; |
d=gmail.com; s=gamma; | |
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to | |
:content-type; | |
bh=hmQVZlcqLZ9Vv6ZzQxW+Tq550rlkc5UXBUicUnB/c/g=; | |
b=lSdVVvnD1TwDNG/2gBDO/kV7rX9ZplKVPE+wfO1u5V0rlZIaZGocKWIPtozLJl/vyP | |
pKQ14uxJIgMKr4XD6ICwYo+a9BtM/mD1sMdTT4ftCs3FtfTT8OwZ8LnZyorECIjdg6Vh | |
4Lu805kf9TKkA7Xdpr+Amzchwq8jVu82YIlyM= | |
MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
In-Reply-To: | <201107011526.p61FQs24012782@envy.delorie.com> |
References: | <BANLkTikW3CVu0QEHyFwgfpvzqNoMR6Tfrg AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> |
<83tyb6qce3 DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> | |
<BANLkTi=q_JbhptgWTi8ZN7mtq9NO9zPX0g AT mail DOT gmail DOT com> | |
<201107011526 DOT p61FQs24012782 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> | |
Date: | Fri, 1 Jul 2011 18:37:44 +0300 |
Message-ID: | <BANLkTi=BU4UzOR+RtD9hJRCtKq6eR3AYog@mail.gmail.com> |
Subject: | Re: gcc-4.4: conflicting types for built-in function 'cabs' and 'cabsf' |
From: | Ozkan Sezer <sezeroz AT gmail DOT com> |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
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 Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 6:26 PM, DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> wrote: > >> double cabs(double complex z); > > Right, newer gccs have a real "complex" type, instead of a structure. > Then yell at you if you disagree with them :-P > Exactly so. And why does even djgpp libm bother with cabs[f] ? It doesn't provide a complex.h, neither does it provide a prototype of these functions elsewhere. -- O.S.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |