www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Sun, 9 Jun 2002 18:01:49 -0400 |
Message-Id: | <200206092201.g59M1nQ09875@envy.delorie.com> |
X-Authentication-Warning: | envy.delorie.com: dj set sender to dj AT delorie DOT com using -f |
From: | DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com> |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
In-reply-to: | <10206091606.AA21148@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu) |
Subject: | Re: ISO C99 double math functions |
References: | <10206091606 DOT AA21148 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> |
Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
> Unless there are legal reasons to do so, writing replacement > functions sounds like a complete waste of effort (both doing it and > maintaining it). I spot-checked a few of the files, and the copyrights seem compatible with the ways we distribute djgpp's C library. > If we removed all of our definitions which are redundant with > fdlibm, and just build fdlibm modules as part of the libc, what are > the drawbacks? fdlibm's implementations are larger byte-wise.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |