[Bug c++/49813] [C++0x] sinh vs asinh vs constexpr

[jakub at gcc dot gnu.org]

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49813

--- Comment #61 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Jonathan Wakely from comment #60)
> There's no wiggle room, we're definitely non-conforming.
> 
> Maybe the changes could be limited to -std=gnu++NN modes only, although
> Paolo argued strongly against that in this bug report.
> 
> It doesn't seem to be causing any issues for anybody though, so I'm not very
> motivated to "fix" our non-conformance by removing features (and probably
> breaking somebody's code).

I'd say we should (but perhaps for GCC11 only) remove those constexpr markings
and users that really need constexpr behavior will just need to use
__builtin_sinh etc. instead which ought to be constexpr because it is a
builtin.