[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-01-27 15:52 --- Fixed both hpux and solaris (as reported privately by Eric, thanks!) with: http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-cvs/2005-01/msg01023.html -- What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED Target Milestone|--- |4.0.0 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243
[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2004-12-20 20:02 --- *** Bug 19086 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243
[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
--- Additional Comments From ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-13 15:37 --- Present on all versions of Solaris up to (and including) version 9. -- What|Removed |Added CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot gnu dot ||org GCC build triplet|hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20|*-*-hpux1[01]*, *-*- ||solaris2.[56789] GCC host triplet|hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20|*-*-hpux1[01].*, *-*- ||solaris2.[56789] GCC target triplet|hppa1.1-hp-hpux10.20|*-*-hpux1[01].*, *-*- ||solaris2.[56789] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243
[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
--- Additional Comments From bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2004-11-03 00:18 ---
Simple grep:
/include/std/std_complex.h: __complex_arg(__complex__ float __z) { return
__builtin_cargf(__z); }
Simple theory: on targets without __builtin_cargf, cargf gets referenced with
this call. However, no checking for cargf or provided function in libmath stubs
for this. So, the failure.
In fact, in 2000 cargf was taken out of libmath, because it was unused.
I think this is related, in general, to the meta-issue of what the hell libmath
is supposed to do, and if perhaps it's time for fortran, java, c++ etc to all
punt to a top-level C99 math library for this stuff if native libc/libm can't
hack it. And why stop there... just import all of glibc + GSL? Ack.
That's my vote, at the moment.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243
[Bug libstdc++/17243] Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
--- Additional Comments From gdr at cs dot tamu dot edu 2004-11-03 00:28 ---
Subject: Re: Test failures due to missing C99 symbols
bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
| Simple grep:
|
| /include/std/std_complex.h: __complex_arg(__complex__ float __z) { return
| __builtin_cargf(__z); }
|
| Simple theory: on targets without __builtin_cargf, cargf gets referenced with
| this call. However, no checking for cargf or provided function in libmath stubs
| for this. So, the failure.
|
| In fact, in 2000 cargf was taken out of libmath, because it was unused.
At that moment we did not bother about the namespace issues and we did
not use the built-ins as a way to walk around our failure to correctly
implement that C-header stuff.
| I think this is related, in general, to the meta-issue of what the hell libmath
| is supposed to do, and if perhaps it's time for fortran, java, c++ etc to all
| punt to a top-level C99 math library for this stuff if native libc/libm can't
| hack it. And why stop there... just import all of glibc + GSL? Ack.
I would not go as far as importing the whole monster glibc+GSL. But, most
definitely it is time that we have the math stuff in libgcc and shared
by all other front-ends. It does not make sense that each
front-end/library code the same hack endlessly. And even more so,
the compiler could safely base optimizations on its knowledge of the
stuff there -- that is an area where ICC shrines.
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17243
