C9x conformance check
Andreas Jaeger
aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de
Fri Aug 28 22:33:00 GMT 1998
>>>>> Zack Weinberg writes:
> I did a check of conformance to the draft standard in the headers provided
> by gcc and glibc. Take the results with a grain of salt; there may be
> problems with the checker, also I have only the April draft and egcs-1.0.3.
> I wasn't able to check typedefs or struct definitions.
Zack,
here're just two short comments to make your list a bit shorter;-).
> [...]
> Problems which are libc's fault:
> [..]
> math.h: isinf() should be a macro; furthermore, it's hiding under
> __USE_MISC.
> scalb(), scalbl(), scalbf() should be under _BSD_SOURCE; C9x only has
> scalbn().
> C9x specifies gamma(); libc only has tgamma().
That has changed in the last draft. tgamma is now specified by C9x.
> Problems due to interaction effects or where either party can be blamed:
> [..]
> stdbool.h does not exist. This header is trivial but we should agree on who
> provides it.
It is already provided by the latest egcs snapshots and will be in
egcs 1.1.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de jaeger@informatik.uni-kl.de
for pgp-key finger ajaeger@aixd1.rhrk.uni-kl.de
More information about the Libc-hacker
mailing list