From owner-freebsd-standards@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 1 19:39:46 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361F216A4CE; Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:39:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (troutmask.apl.washington.edu [128.208.78.105]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6ECC43FE1; Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:39:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: from troutmask.apl.washington.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) hB23dg8u098845; Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:39:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu) Received: (from sgk@localhost)hB23dfT5098844; Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:39:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sgk) Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 19:39:41 -0800 From: Steve Kargl To: Bruce Evans Message-ID: <20031202033941.GA98836@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> References: <20031129000133.GA30662@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20031129080911.GA25448@VARK.homeunix.com> <20031129163105.GA32651@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20031130213951.GA37082@VARK.homeunix.com> <20031201182219.O4431@gamplex.bde.org> <20031201203512.GA95524@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> <20031202091936.I8778@gamplex.bde.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20031202091936.I8778@gamplex.bde.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i cc: David Schultz cc: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Implementing C99's roundf(), round(), and roundl() X-BeenThere: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Standards compliance List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 03:39:46 -0000 On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 09:57:33AM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Steve Kargl wrote: > > > AFAICT, we can't do the exception handling according to POSIX, because > > we don't have , feclearexcept(), and fetestexcept() implemented, > > yet. > > RIght, but we have fpgetsticky(), etc. > Can we use fpgetsticky() and friends to implement parts of or does this cause some (disallowed) namespace pollution? -- Steve