From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 51959 invoked by alias); 6 Jun 2016 21:11:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 51506 invoked by uid 89); 6 Jun 2016 21:11:37 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_RED autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*Ad:U*thomas, Hx-languages-length:579, H*Ad:D*ru X-HELO: relay1.mentorg.com Received: from relay1.mentorg.com (HELO relay1.mentorg.com) (192.94.38.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:11:26 +0000 Received: from nat-ies.mentorg.com ([192.94.31.2] helo=SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com) by relay1.mentorg.com with esmtp id 1bA1nt-0000Ix-FX from joseph_myers@mentor.com ; Mon, 06 Jun 2016 14:11:21 -0700 Received: from digraph.polyomino.org.uk (137.202.0.76) by SVR-IES-FEM-01.mgc.mentorg.com (137.202.0.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.3.224.2; Mon, 6 Jun 2016 22:11:19 +0100 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by digraph.polyomino.org.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bA1nq-0004zE-IC; Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:11:18 +0000 Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2016 21:11:00 -0000 From: Joseph Myers To: Jakub Jelinek CC: Thomas Schwinge , , Alexander Monakov Subject: Re: [PING] [PR other/70945] Handle function_glibc_finite_math in offloading In-Reply-To: <20160603144915.GI7387@tucnak.redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <87vb27tnai.fsf@hertz.schwinge.homeip.net> <87lh2mqqm8.fsf@kepler.schwinge.homeip.net> <20160603144915.GI7387@tucnak.redhat.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-SW-Source: 2016-06/txt/msg00430.txt.bz2 On Fri, 3 Jun 2016, Jakub Jelinek wrote: > On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 04:44:15PM +0200, Thomas Schwinge wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Ping. > > I think it would be better to just add this support to newlib. That suggestion doesn't really make sense to me. Why should newlib be expected to follow the same choices as glibc regarding what variants of libm functions to export, beyond the standard names for those functions, or how to name any variants it does export? -- Joseph S. Myers joseph@codesourcery.com