https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110653
--- Comment #11 from dave.anglin at bell dot net --- On 2023-07-14 5:58 a.m., redi at gcc dot gnu.org wrote: > https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=110653 > > --- Comment #10 from Jonathan Wakely <redi at gcc dot gnu.org> --- > And this should fix it: > > --- a/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdlib > +++ b/libstdc++-v3/include/c_global/cstdlib > @@ -256,6 +256,20 @@ namespace std > using ::__gnu_cxx::strtold; > } // namespace std > > +#else // ! _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDLIB > + > +// We also check for strtof and strtold separately from > _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDLIB > + > +#if _GLIBCXX_HAVE_STRTOF > +#undef strtof > +namespace std { using ::strtof; } > +#endif > + > +#if _GLIBCXX_HAVE_STRTOLD > +#undef strtold > +namespace std { using ::strtold; } > +#endif > + > #endif // _GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDLIB > > } // extern "C++" Yes, this works. hppa64-hpux does not have have strtof. Could std::stof be implemented using strtod in this case? I'm thinking a test to check the presence and maybe compliance of these routines might be good.
