Eric Blake wrote:
> According to Jim Meyering on 10/27/2009 6:24 AM:
>> +
>> + AC_SUBST([GNULIB_WARN_CFLAGS])
>> + GNULIB_WARN_CFLAGS="$WARN_CFLAGS -Wno-missing-prototypes
>> -Wno-uninitialized -Wno-unused-macros -Wno-old-style-definition"
>
> Shouldn't this use gl_MANYWARN_COMPLEMENT([var], [$ws],
> [-Wmissing-prototypes -Wuninitialized...]), rather than assuming that the
> compiler will understand -Wno-missing-prototypes and friends?
Thanks!
Yes, that will be better indeed. Will adjust.
>> ++++ b/lib/isnan.c
>> +@@ -67,6 +67,8 @@
>> + ((sizeof (DOUBLE) + sizeof (unsigned int) - 1) / sizeof (unsigned int))
>> + typedef union { DOUBLE value; unsigned int word[NWORDS]; } memory_double;
>> +
>> ++int FUNC (DOUBLE x);
>
> Why are there no header files declaring rpl_isnan? Isn't a better fix to
> patch math.in.h to declare everything that we will be providing?
I thought I'd reported it already, but didn't go back and check.
It seems I did not, after all.
