Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 23:57:28 -0500 From: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> To: Kostik Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r209110 - in head/lib/msun: . src Message-ID: <20101202045728.GA19295@zim.MIT.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20100615131443.GA93094@zim.MIT.EDU> References: <201006121732.o5CHW5Cs065722@svn.freebsd.org> <20100615084939.GL13238@deviant.kiev.zoral.com.ua> <20100615131443.GA93094@zim.MIT.EDU>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 15, 2010, David Schultz wrote: > On Tue, Jun 15, 2010, Kostik Belousov wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 12, 2010 at 05:32:05PM +0000, David Schultz wrote: > > > Author: das > > > Date: Sat Jun 12 17:32:05 2010 > > > New Revision: 209110 > > > URL: http://svn.freebsd.org/changeset/base/209110 > > > > > > Log: > > > Introduce __isnanf() as an alias for isnanf(), and make the isnan() > > > macro expand to __isnanf() instead of isnanf() for float arguments. > > > This change is needed because isnanf() isn't declared in strict POSIX > > > or C99 mode. > > > > > > Compatibility note: Apps using isnan(float) that are compiled after > > > this change won't link against an older libm. > > > > > > Reported by: Florian Forster <octo@verplant.org> > > > > May be, it makes sense to remove the default version for the isnan symbol ? > > Wouldn't this mean apps that use isnanf() directly will no longer > compile? isnanf() is a historical BSD interface, and although > it's been deprecated for many years, it's still declared (if > __BSD_VISIBLE). > > Oops, to complicate matters further, I just noticed that we > already have isnanf and __isnanf symbols in libc, so maybe the new > symbol isn't needed. (isnan() and isnanf() are in libc because > that's where they were historically.) The second version in > libm looks like a mistake (wrong scope of the #if 0 in s_isnan.c.) > Perhaps we could just remove the duplicate symbols from libm. Any thoughts on removing the isnanf and __isnanf symbols from libm? Both symbols are already in libc for historical reasons, so the duplication isn't needed. Although we've had the duplicate isnanf symbol in libm for several releases, I don't believe removing it will cause problems; apps will just pick up the libc version. __isnanf is only present in libm in 9-CURRENT (due to the commit referenced above). Because of symbol version differences, however, removing it will affect apps that were linked under 9-CURRENT AND rely on isnanf AND link against libm before libc. On my system, libwebkit is the only affected binary I could find.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20101202045728.GA19295>