This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC 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: Problems with PR 21210

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
To: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>,libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org, jason at redhat dot com,nathan at codesourcery dot com, ncm at codesourcery dot com
Date: Mon, 30 May 2005 22:39:48 +0200
Subject: Re: Problems with PR 21210
References: <200505292006.j4TK6ktK008048@sethra.codesourcery.com> <m33bs5elwa.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net> <429A2C6E.5030608@codesourcery.com>

Mark Mitchell wrote:

> That's OK with me -- if you're willing to accept the fact that this
> will silently change the meaning of:
>
>   __complex__ double c99_cd;
>   complex<double> cpp_cd(c99_cd);
>
> I just want to make sure that you're aware that what you're suggesting
> will change that; it will now simply copy the real part, and ignore
> the imaginary part.

Sorry in advance if I'm saying something stupid (I'm rather tired) but
this change would be really disruptive: consider the way we are dealing
with transcendental functions: we are *everywhere* implicitly using the
above, right?!?

Paolo.

References:
- Problems with PR 21210
  - From: Mark Mitchell
- Re: Problems with PR 21210
  - From: Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: Problems with PR 21210
  - From: Mark Mitchell

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