From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 26062 invoked by alias); 20 Mar 2007 11:04:19 -0000 Received: (qmail 26038 invoked by uid 48); 20 Mar 2007 11:04:10 -0000 Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2007 11:04:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20070320110410.26037.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug middle-end/31249] pseudo-optimzation with sincos/cexpi In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org" Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2007-03/txt/msg01920.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #7 from rguenth at gcc dot gnu dot org 2007-03-20 11:04 ------- I agree it's surprising to get user-visible effects with the TARGET_C99_FUNCTIONS difference between the frontends, but they are (supposed to) providing C99 runtime completion by their runtime libraries. And they rely on full C99 support. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=31249