Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2003 20:03:36 +0200
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <7458-Wed27Aug2003200336+0300-eliz@elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <200308251747.h7PHl6XI023636@speedy.ludd.luth.se>
	(ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se)
Subject: Re: <math.h> and <libm/math.h>
References:  <200308251747 DOT h7PHl6XI023636 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: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 19:47:06 +0200 (CEST)
> 
> Now when (soon i. e.) isnan() and isinf() is in libc and <math.h> is
> updated, I think libm should be converted to used them.
> 
> libm's makefile #defines _USE_LIBM_MATH_H.
> 
> What should be done? Should <libm/math.h> be updated according to
> <math.h>?

I think we should simply modify include/libm.h so that it works both
for libc.a nd for libm.a (when compiling the libraries _and_ when
compiling prfograms that use the libraries).  Then we could have
<libm/math.h> include <math.h> (for back-compatibility) and do nothing
else.

Any takers?