--
Bug 21743 depends on bug 21784, which changed state.
Bug 21784 Summary: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Using vs builtin names
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21784
What|Old Value |New Value
--
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-30 20:19
---
Fixed for 4.1.0
--
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-30
20:17 ---
Subject: Bug 21743
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-30 20:16:59
Modified files:
gcc/testsuite : ChangeLog
gcc/testsuite/gcc.
--- Additional Comments From cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-30
20:15 ---
Subject: Bug 21743
CVSROOT:/cvs/gcc
Module name:gcc
Changes by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2005-05-30 20:15:48
Modified files:
gcc: ChangeLog builtins.def
gcc/d
--
Bug 21743 depends on bug 21784, which changed state.
Bug 21784 Summary: [3.4/4.0/4.1 Regression] Using vs builtin names
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21784
What|Old Value |New Value
--
--
What|Removed |Added
BugsThisDependsOn||21784
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21743
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-26 17:59
---
A fix along the way suggested by Andrew doesn't seem implementable in a very
clean
way, because no DEF_*_BUILTIN category does exactly what we want: 1- only
__builtin_* variant (BOTH_P == false); 2- fall back to
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-24 22:46
---
Ah, ah, cool, thanks! I'm going to propose that!
--
What|Removed |Added
AssignedTo|unassign
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-24
22:20 ---
If you uncomment what is in builtins.def, you get both clog and __builtin_clog.
If we define it as DEF_LIB_BUILTIN instead of DEF_C99_BUILTIN, we only get
__builtin_clog.
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
--- Additional Comments From pcarlini at suse dot de 2005-05-24 22:14
---
> We could just define the __builtin_ version of the function.
I don't understand, can you explain? In my understanding everything is in place,
indeed all the other builtins are there, *only* we cannot do that for
--- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-05-24
22:07 ---
We could just define the __builtin_ version of the function.
I keep on wondering if (and when) C++ gets the C99 complex functions and types,
what would they do
about complex log.
Confirmed.
--
11 matches
Mail list logo