svn commit: r253764 - head/lib/msun/src
theraven at FreeBSD.org
Mon Jul 29 12:00:40 UTC 2013
It's very difficult within this verbiage to work out what you believe the correct code should look like. Please either provide a patch or commit the fix yourself.
On 29 Jul 2013, at 11:59, Bruce Evans <brde at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> On Mon, 29 Jul 2013, David Chisnall wrote:
>> Author: theraven
>> Date: Mon Jul 29 08:32:13 2013
>> New Revision: 253764
>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/253764
>> Reenable the isnan(double) / isinf(double) declarations when targeting C89 + SUSv2 mode.
> This isn't reenabling. but breaks the isnan() and isinf() macros by
> #undefing them.
>> Modified: head/lib/msun/src/math.h
>> --- head/lib/msun/src/math.h Mon Jul 29 08:08:43 2013 (r253763)
>> +++ head/lib/msun/src/math.h Mon Jul 29 08:32:13 2013 (r253764)
>> @@ -209,6 +209,21 @@ __inline_isnanl(__const long double __x)
>> return (__x != __x);
>> + * Version 2 of the Single UNIX Specification (UNIX98) defined isnan() and
>> + * isinf() as functions taking double. C99, and the subsequent POSIX revisions
>> + * (SUSv3, POSIX.1-2001, define it as a macro that accepts any real floating
>> + * point type. If we are targeting SUSv2 and C99 or C11 (or C++11) then we
>> + * expose the newer definition, assuming that the language spec takes
>> + * precedence over the operating system interface spec.
>> + */
>> +#if __XSI_VISIBLE > 0 && __XSI_VISIBLE < 600 && __ISO_C_VISIBLE < 1999
>> +#undef isinf
>> +#undef isnan
>> +int isinf(double);
>> +int isnan(double);
> Old versions declared these functions by temporarily hiding the macro
> definitions using parentheses, and also sorted the declarations differently
> (into the __BSD_VISIBLE || __ISO_C_VISIBLE >= 1999 || __XSI_VISIBLE
> section. The __ISO_C_VISIBLE part of that ifdef is not quite broken for
> these functions, since although they aren't in C99, I think only
> non-conforming code can use them as functions). If the above ifdef is
> correct, then it is still unsorted. Other ifdefs for fine-grained
> XSI ifdefs are sorted later, in ascending order on __XSI_VISIBLE.
> The others are written with slightly unclear nested conditions for
> @ #if __BSD_VISIBLE || __XSI_VISIBLE
> Boolean conditions. You obfuscate the boolean condition __XSI_VISIBLE
> by writing it as __XSI_VISIBLE > 0.
> @ double j0(double);
> @ double j1(double);
> @ double jn(int, double);
> @ double y0(double);
> @ double y1(double);
> @ double yn(int, double);
> @ @ #if __XSI_VISIBLE <= 500 || __BSD_VISIBLE
> Now the same boolean condition for the __BSD_VISIBLE part (obfuscated by
> writing the conditions in the opposite order), but a further restriction
> for the __XSI_VISIBLE part. __XSI_VISIBLE <= 500 by itself would be
> broken since it would be satisfied by __XSI_VISIBLE == 0 which means
> @ double gamma(double);
> @ #endif
> @ @ #if __XSI_VISIBLE <= 600 || __BSD_VISIBLE
> As above, for a later XSI.
> You obfuscate the version tests further using '<' instead of '<='. '< 600'
> does make more sense than '<= 500', since if 5 and 6 represent major
> releases then API changes should occur at 600 not at 501.
> @ double scalb(double, double);
> @ #endif
> @ #endif /* __BSD_VISIBLE || __XSI_VISIBLE */
>> double acos(double);
>> double asin(double);
>> double atan(double);
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 881 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
More information about the svn-src-head