This is the mail archive of the libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the libstdc++ project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [v3] C99 complex math vs. std::complex


Paolo Carlini <pcarlini@suse.de> writes:

| Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
| 
| >That workaround was put in it back to 1999 (I think) because some targets
| >like alpha were unable to handle aggregate return in registers
| >(somehow provoked by the synthetized copy constructor).  If you
| >can confirm that the bug was fixed on such targets, then it means that
| >macro was never defined since then, therefore it is no longer an
| >ABI-breaking patch.  Otherwise, it would have to wait for so_7 branch.
| >
| I think it's safe to remove it because Benjamin removed back in 2001 the
| relevant autoconf tests as obsolete: therefore nothing currently defines the
| macro at install time and, by the way, it's also completely undocumented.

Thanks for verifying that the macro is never set.  I however have a
question: 

[...]

| //////////////////////
| 2005-01-26  Paolo Carlini  <pcarlini@suse.de>
| 
| 	* acinclude.m4 ([GLIBCXX_ENABLE_C99]): Add ac_c99_complex
| 	in the final test for enable_c99, thus robustifying it; remove
| 	duplicate final test on ac_99_math.
| 	* configure: Regenerate.

How is that related to the below?

| 	* include/std/std_complex.h: Remove usages of the dead
| 	_GLIBCXX_BUGGY_COMPLEX macro.

-- Gaby


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]