This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [libstdc++] numeric_limits: round_style, round_error
- From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>
- To: Richard Henderson <rth at twiddle dot net>
- Cc: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>, "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, "gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 22 Sep 2002 21:49:31 +0200
- Subject: Re: [libstdc++] numeric_limits: round_style, round_error
- Organization: Integrable Solutions
- References: <20020921153114.A2149@twiddle.net> <email@example.com> <20020922124314.A8266@twiddle.net>
Richard Henderson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
| On Sun, Sep 22, 2002 at 12:27:21PM -0700, Mark Mitchell wrote:
| > A technical comment, which I'm not sure applies, since I didn't try to
| > read through all of the patches.
| > If you have changed the value of *any* constant exposed by a V3
| > header, you have changed the ABI.
| In a few cases it does apply. Not many though.
| The bulk of the changes have been to use the compiler's knowledge of
| what types are what, and do constant folding as appropriate, rather
| than try to replicate this in the preprocessor and libstdc++ configury.
| I estimate a total reduction in size of libstdc++ by at least 3000 lines.
And if I didn't say it before: Thanks!
| > However, we should point out in case somebody cares.
| Where's the best place to put this information?
Probably in our non-existent numeric_limits<> documentation web-pages.
I see C has documentations for implementation defined behaviour and
constants. We could do the same for C++ there.