[Bug libstdc++/20758] operator-(const T&, const complex<T>&) vs operator-(const complex<T>&, const complex<T>&)

[pcarlini at suse dot de]

------- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de  2005-04-06 09:17 -------
> I think we need more careful analysis and tracking of both C99, C++ and
> LIA-3.

Ok, thanks, I will start on such analysis (in particulat wrt LIA-3). A minor
issue with complex1.patch is that probably unary operator- is cheaper than
a full subtraction, still, at the end, probably something similar will be
needed. I should also remark that this is definitely not a regression and
that, indeed, the current C++ standard, completely ignores signed zero, NAN,
INF, etc...

-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=20758