From: <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200306211138.h5LBcwi3013425@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: LIBC C files patches to build with GCC 3.3 (non math files)
In-Reply-To: <002201c337b1$b3fdce40$0100a8c0@acp42g> "from Andrew Cottrell at
 Jun 21, 2003 02:58:05 pm"
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2003 13:38:58 +0200 (CEST)
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL78 (25)]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
X-MailScanner: Found to be clean
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

According to Andrew Cottrell:
> *** \djgppcvs\include\libc\ieee.h Wed Feb  5 18:10:52 2003
> --- ieee.h Sat Jun 21 14:44:38 2003
> *************** typedef struct {
> *** 38,43 ****
> --- 38,62 ----
>     unsigned sign:1;
>   } long_double_t;
> 
> +
> + typedef union
> + {
> +   double d;
> +   double_t dt;
> + } _double_union_t;
> +
> + typedef union
> + {
> +   long double ld;
> +   long_double_t ldt;
> + } longdouble_union_t;

Why not stay out of the applications name space by naming this one
_longdouble_union_t? And perhaps it should be _long_double_union_t
too?


Right,

						MartinS