--- Comment #3 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-25 01:22 ---
Fixed:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-09/msg01545.html
--
danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:
What|Removed |Added
--
--- Comment #2 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-17 08:33 ---
I guess so. All the testcases rely on either availability of cexp() or
sincos().
For the former via TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS, for the latter via TARGET_HAS_SINCOS.
But it is interesting that -59 fails, as the transform
--- Comment #1 from danglin at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-09-15 22:48 ---
Regarding builtins-59.c, I believe it fails because expand_builtin_sincos()
returns NULL_RTX if the sincos insn is not available. Possibly, this is a
bit pessimistic but it looks like I should xfail the two failing
