------- Comment #33 from bkoz at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-04-06 17:15 -------
>Nice idea, but I'm not sure it would work (i'm not very familiar with __thread, >etc.): are we sure that with that kind of declaration the strtof & co functions >themselves automatically use that new "improved" errno instead of the global >one? Ack, no, they will not. So, this is a non-starter. >Besides that, from a correctness point of view, I don't think we want to >fail in case of underflow, other implementations behave differently from v3... Hmm. Well, I leave this in your capable hands. -benjamin -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31117
