This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: [RFC Patch]: Implement remainder() as built-in function [PR fortran/24518]
- From: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- To: "Kaveh R. GHAZI" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- Cc: Roger Sayle <roger at eyesopen dot com>, Mike Stump <mrs at apple dot com>, Richard Guenther <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, Uros Bizjak <ubizjak at gmail dot com>, FX Coudert <fxcoudert at gmail dot com>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:55:57 +0000 (UTC)
- Subject: Re: [RFC Patch]: Implement remainder() as built-in function [PR fortran/24518]
- References: <Pine.LNX.firstname.lastname@example.org> <Pine.GSO.email@example.com>
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006, Kaveh R. GHAZI wrote:
> I think this came up before. Someone once told me that it's legal to
> reassign stdout, in which case your __libgcc_stdout variable won't track
> the new value of stdout and code that relies on this will break.
> What may do the trick is "FILE **__libgcc_stdout = &stdout;", then you
> would always insert *__libgcc_stdout in the builtin transformations.
> Or maybe if we had something like a C++ reference to stdout, I don't know
> if we can construct something like this from the middle-end in trees.
I haven't reread the whole previous discussion - why did we reject your
previous __builtin_initialize_stdout or RTH's proposal of an inline
<http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-09/msg00859.html>? There were
problems with wrapping the headers, but I am sure those can be solved.
Joseph S. Myers