[Bug c++/49813] [C++0x] sinh vs asinh vs constexpr

["rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813

--- Comment #10 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-07-22 11:17:38 UTC ---
On Fri, 22 Jul 2011, paolo.carlini at oracle dot com wrote:

> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
> 
> --- Comment #9 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2011-07-22 11:09:55 UTC ---
> Yes, Vincenzo, all the other C99-only functions should be audited. I suppose a
> clean fix will automatically deal with all of them.

Looking at -original it seems that libstdc++ lacks C99 overloads for
double - it has them for float and long double only.

Or that

  inline float
  asinh(float __x)
  { return __builtin_asinhf(__x); }

  inline long double
  asinh(long double __x)
  { return __builtin_asinhl(__x); }

  template<typename _Tp>
    inline typename __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<__is_integer<_Tp>::__value,
                                           double>::__type
    asinh(_Tp __x)
    { return __builtin_asinh(__x); }

isn't constexpr compatible.

Doesn't sound like a middle-end issue but either a library or frontend
issue to me.

That said, it works fine if you give a asinh declaration in the
testcase.

Richard.