From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 15 14:30:57 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E393F106566C; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:30:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brde@optusnet.com.au) Received: from mail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail07.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.188]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F9B48FC15; Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:30:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from c122-106-175-69.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au (c122-106-175-69.carlnfd1.nsw.optusnet.com.au [122.106.175.69]) by mail07.syd.optusnet.com.au (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id o5FEUrQ7005231 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:30:55 +1000 Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 00:30:53 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org To: David Schultz In-Reply-To: <20100615131443.GA93094@zim.MIT.EDU> Message-ID: <20100616001659.G38908@delplex.bde.org> References: <201006121732.o5CHW5Cs065722@svn.freebsd.org> <20100615084939.GL13238@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20100615131443.GA93094@zim.MIT.EDU> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: Kostik Belousov , svn-src-head@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r209110 - in head/lib/msun: . src X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:30:58 -0000 On Tue, 15 Jun 2010, David Schultz wrote: > Oops, to complicate matters further, I just noticed that we > already have isnanf and __isnanf symbols in libc, so maybe the new > symbol isn't needed. (isnan() and isnanf() are in libc because > that's where they were historically.) The second version in > libm looks like a mistake (wrong scope of the #if 0 in s_isnan.c.) > Perhaps we could just remove the duplicate symbols from libm. > > Better would be to remove the symbols from libc and have them in > libm where they belong, but I'm not sure if that would break anything. Better move Standard C symbols from libm to libc where they belong :-). Even Unix programmers should not be too surprised now if the Standard part of the libm namespace becomes more reserved. (It is already partly reserved -- gcc warns about use of cos() without including , and once you have included the whole compile-time libm namespace is reserved.) BTW, c89 is missing the -lm needed to make it a C compiler, and its man page doesn't say anything about this. Similarly for gcc (?, man page too large to check). Bruce