On Wed, Nov 24, 2021 at 05:22:57PM -0300, Raoni Fassina Firmino wrote: > Hi Joseph, > > Thanks for the detailed review and explanations.
>From me as well :-) > On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 03:54:53PM +0000, Joseph Myers wrote: > > However, it's better to get things right automatically without needing any > > macros or other header additions at all. That is, define feclearexcept as > > a built-in function, *without* the extra arguments, and with the back end > > knowing about the FE_* values for the target libc. Then you can simply > > avoid expanding the function inline when the back end doesn't know both > > the FE_* values and how to use them. > > I took this part to heart, I agree that an approach in molds of the v5 > sounds more like it, something that will "just works" or fallback > gracefully. And who knew, with your insight I think I find just > the thing, I am finishing a v7 and I hope it address the previews > consernings and sidestep all this complications with the v6 aproach. What you will lose this way is that it will not work on any C library that doesn't have explicit support. Which is a shame, but it seems we cannot avoid this. Especially the "fesetround should be a function, not a macro" argument is a showstopper :-/ Thanks, Segher
