Hi, Systems without fmaf will very likely miss fmal and all the C99 functions, so they have many other problems to worry about.
LGTM. One question, though. Why using ::fma; using ::fmaf; but not using ::fmal; This is not fma specific question - cmath repeats this pattern for all C99 functions. Shouldn't all three version treated the same? Yaron 2014-02-22 17:44 GMT+02:00 Marshall Clow <[email protected]>: > http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=18910 > > Remove the implementation of "std:::fmaf" from libc++'s <cmath> header, > and use the c library's one instead. > > I believe this bug is a historical relic from the early days of libc++ > implementation. > It was part of the original libc++ checkin to the LLVM repo. > Probably very old versions of Apple's C library were based on C89, which > didn't have fmaf, and so Howard just provided this here. > [ When I say very old, I mean in the Mac OS X 10.3/10.4 timeframe ] > > Now we have C99 libraries in most places, and they all (as far as I can > tell) provide fmaf themselves, and (I think) we can remove this. > > If you're running on a system that has an older C library implementation, > this could be a breaking change, and I want to know about it. > I can put this code back under an #ifdef for those systems, but not if I > don't know which systems they are. > > -- Marshall > > > _______________________________________________ > cfe-commits mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits > >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
