X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2005 02:10:57 -0300 From: John Coppens To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: Complex.h file Message-Id: <20051120021057.8e5ba2d2.john@jcoppens.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20051119113646 DOT e162e782 DOT john AT jcoppens DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 18:55:33 +0000 (UTC) Tony Richardson wrote: > _Complex double x = 7 + 8i; > x += -3 - 4i; > x *= 2 + 5i; > x /= 3 - 4i; > printf("(%f,%f)\n", creal(x), cimag(x)); > > but it does not have built-in support for all of the complex functions > that are declared in complex.h. I would assume the "problem" is > more of newlib issue than a gcc one. Hi Tony. That's good news - I couldn't find much info on the nuts and bolts of the complex stuff in gcc-3.4.x (Is there some manual that is up-to-date? The gcc manuals I found are from 2002 or older). I just tried to change a few complex declarations to _Complex on the big machine and they even seem compatible with the normal 'complex' declarations. The program doesn't use sophisticated complex functions, so there's a good possibility it'll work. Anyway, I'll also explore the minGW way, as I would appreciate stand-alone executables. Thanks for the info. John -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/