On Sun, 23 May 2010, Marc Espie wrote: > On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 12:46:41PM +0200, Antoine Jacoutot wrote: > > > Which one ? The only fenv.h I see in the gcc4 port is C++ tr1/fenv.h... > > > which is in base as well, and equally useful. > > > > Exactly, this is why I don't undersand "we don't have fenv.h". > > > the tr1/fenv.h is part of the addition of fenv to C++ post ISO C++98. > (e.g., tr1:: namespace, and not std::) > > fenv.h is a standard ISO C header, as of ISO C 99. We don't have it. > I think there was some support issue, and it's likely to become easier > on gcc4 arches. > > => We currently don't have fenv.h, to be understood in context as "the fenv.h > that's part of ISO C 99". > > I don't know what the stance of Objective C would be. To the best of my > knowledge, there's no objective-C standard. What I'm certain of, though, > is that it won't reference C++ headers...
Ok that makes more sense now. Too bad it wasn't in commit msg ;-) Anyway, it seems at one point building gnustep-base picked up tr1/fenv.h with gcc4 (Jasper saw this) and this is why this patch was added because it broke building with gcc3. -- Antoine
