This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug c++/49813] [C++0x] sinh vs asinh vs constexpr
- From: "jason at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 14:43:15 +0000
- Subject: [Bug c++/49813] [C++0x] sinh vs asinh vs constexpr
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-49813-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813
Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed| |2011.07.22 14:41:46
AssignedTo|unassigned at gcc dot |jason at gcc dot gnu.org
|gnu.org |
Ever Confirmed|0 |1
--- Comment #19 from Jason Merrill <jason at gcc dot gnu.org> 2011-07-22 14:41:46 UTC ---
Strictly speaking, the bug is that
constexpr double ds = sinh(1.0); // Ok
is accepted; the standard doesn't say that sinh is constexpr, so it isn't
usable in a constant expression. G++ treating built-ins as constexpr is an
extension, which should be disabled in strict conformance mode. Paolo, can you
raise the question of marking C library functions as constexpr with the library
WG?
But practically speaking, we should have C90 builtins in C++98, and C99
builtins in C++11. I suppose that means setting flag_isoc94 and flag_isoc99 in
C++.