This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libfortran/24903] dotprod should use conj?
- From: "fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 21 Nov 2005 09:11:00 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libfortran/24903] dotprod should use conj?
- References: <bug-24903-6528@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Comment #2 from fxcoudert at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-11-21 09:11 -------
(In reply to comment #0)
> conjga = conj(*pa);
> or
> conjga = conjl(*pa);
> or
> conjga = conjf(*pa);
I'm ready to do that, but since complex numbers in C are always a pain, I want
to know: are we sure that conj/conjf/conjl are *always* available? I mean, are
they part of the things gcc provides even if there is no library support for
them in the runtime libm?
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=24903