|
Message-ID: <20240626152320.GK10433@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 11:23:20 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: enh <enh@...gle.com> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: roundf() (and round(), and ...) On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 06:36:09AM -0400, enh wrote: > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 7:35 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 06:28:52PM -0400, enh wrote: > > > i don't know about gcc, but iirc for clang you don't even need to do > > > that. it assumes it knows what various functions mean, and inlines > > > trivial stuff like this anyway... > > > > Not with -ffreestanding. If it does that with -ffreestanding, it's a > > bug. > > no, but my point is that most of your _users_ will never see the libm > functions anyway. (at least not on architectures new enough that their > fp instructions are basically "we went through <math.h> and added an > instruction for everything that was easy", like arm64 or riscv64.) They will if they take the address of those functions and call them indirectly, or if they're using (still default I think; if so that should be fixed) -fmath-errno, etc. Inlining is an optimization; it's not by itself a conforming implementation. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.