Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 15:13:13 -0800 From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Is libc C99 compliant? Message-ID: <20190130231313.GA27873@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Originally sent to freebsd-standards@ and freebsd-toolchain@,
but those list appear to be defunct.
Is libc C99 compliant?
--
steve
----- Forwarded message from Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu> -----
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 13:29:04 -0800
From: Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>
To: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org, freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
Subject: Is libc C99 compliant?
User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.2 (2019-01-07)
When building gcc file gcc/config/freebsd.c contains
#define TARGET_LIBC_HAS_FUNCTION no_c99_libc_has_function
In targhook.c, one finds
/* By default we assume that c99 functions are present at the runtime,
but sincos is not. */
bool
default_libc_has_function (enum function_class fn_class)
{
if (fn_class == function_c94
|| fn_class == function_c99_misc
|| fn_class == function_c99_math_complex)
return true;
return false;
}
bool
no_c99_libc_has_function (enum function_class fn_class ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED)
{
return false;
}
Shouldi/can TARGET_LIBC_HAS_FUNCTION be updated to at least
default_libc_has_function? More importantly now that libm
contains sincos[fl], should FreeBSD gcc config file be updated
to use
bool
bsd_libc_has_function (enum function_class fn_class)
{
if (fn_class == function_c94
|| fn_class == function_c99_misc
|| fn_class == function_c99_math_complex
|| fn_class == function_sincos)
return true;
return false;
}
--
Steve
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Steve
20170425 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWUpyCsUKR4
20161221 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbCHE-hONow
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20190130231313.GA27873>