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: "paolo.carlini at oracle dot com" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:31:33 +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
--- Comment #21 from Paolo Carlini <paolo.carlini at oracle dot com> 2011-07-22 15:31:15 UTC ---
Hum (Jason and Daniel, in particular) I'm wondering if the issue could fall
under http://lwg.github.com/issues/lwg-active.html#2013 but then, we would be
able to assume / do it only for glibc on which we have control?!? I have no
idea if the implementations in the various libc out there all satisfy the
prerequisites for a function to be marked constexpr. Do you see my point? Or
Jason you mean something else entirely?