standards/175811: libstdc++ needs complex support in order use C99
sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu
Thu May 30 20:15:14 UTC 2013
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 02:43:51PM -0500, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
> On 30.05.2013 12:13, Steve Kargl wrote:
> > C99 defines many long double functions. Anyone wanting
> > to use C and libm, and not C++ and boost, will need
> > quality implementations of these functions. Of course,
> > the lack of any actual C99 compiler tends to dampen
> > this argument.
> > What I find appalling is reading "people are tired
> > of the situation with libm, so I'm going to commit
> > some atrocious hack". The proper response should be
> > "so I'm going to help implement and test the missing
> > functionality". It's unfortunate that only a few
> > individuals are working to fix libm, but such is
> > life.
> I guess I was trying to hint that Boost is a good
> place to look at to get ideas for the implementations
> for such stuff. Stephen knows this well though since
> he actually fixed some complex functions in boost :).
Boost might be a good place to look for implementation
ideas. Looking at the msun code also works. As does
searching with google. This is all secondary to the
real issue. The real problem is no one is willing to
step forward to actually help write and test the code.
Everyone seems to be waiting (and complaining!) for
someone else to do the work. I've been chipping away at
libm issues since 2003, and given my available free time
I should have a fully compliant C99 libm around 2025 or
More information about the freebsd-numerics