From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9456 invoked by alias); 21 Apr 2009 20:16:17 -0000 Received: (qmail 9365 invoked by uid 48); 21 Apr 2009 20:16:02 -0000 Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:16:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20090421201602.9364.qmail@sourceware.org> X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC References: Subject: [Bug libstdc++/39491] [4.4/4.5 regression] symbol __signbitl@GLIBCXX_3.4 in libstdc++ not exported anymore In-Reply-To: Reply-To: gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org From: "carlos at codesourcery dot com" 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: 2009-04/txt/msg01863.txt.bz2 ------- Comment #11 from carlos at codesourcery dot com 2009-04-21 20:16 ------- Yes, if gcc does not determine that "sizeof (x) == sizeof (double)" then it would have to emit code for the if-then-else statement and this would create a reference to an undefined __signbitl. Has this ever happened? I've never seen it. At present glibc does not create an long double alias for the double __signbit function, but for the sake of correctness it probably should. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=39491