Paul Eggert wrote: > > Globally, I think this is backwards: 'copysign' is a more general function > > than 'signbit', > > That's true in general but this is a special case. 'copysign' has > been standardized since 1985, is well understood, and is available on > many older platforms. 'signbit' was standardized far more recently, > and is not available on many platforms that are still shipping, e.g., > Solaris 9.
Sure. But I find it better if the structure of the gnulib code (or any code, more generally) is a function of the logic/semantics that it implements, not a function of the history of various standards. Bruno
