Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 12:27:38 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se
Message-Id: <6808-Wed23Apr2003122737+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
CC: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <200304221819.h3MIJuOH013058@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
	(ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se)
Subject: Re: Yet another try on nan in strto{f,d,ld}
References:  <200304221819 DOT h3MIJuOH013058 AT speedy DOT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
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
Precedence: bulk

> From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
> Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2003 20:19:55 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> Couldn't we have both functions described on the same page, but with
> different @port-notes?

It's possible, but as Richard said, it will complicate things: we
either have only one of the functions in the alphabetical listing, or
will need to upgrade mkdoc so it produces two menu items that point
to the same node.

So I think it's best to avoid that.  Cut-n-paste is so much easier!

> > > Index: djgpp/src/libc/ansi/stdlib/strtold.c
> > [snip]
> > > +          n.mantissal = mantissa_bits & 0xffffffff;
> > > +         n.mantissah = (mantissa_bits >> 32) & 0xffffffff;
> > 
> > The indentation looks inconsistent here.
> 
> Indeed. Looks in this mail. The code looks fine. It seems my emacs
> inserts tabs when I tabify to make the lines line up. Is that a
> problem?

It's not a problem, but if your mail client converts tabs into
spaces, the result will look wrong.

I don't see this as a grave problem, though.