> - static double ldexp (double x, int exponent) { return x + exponent; }
> + /* A dummy definition that will never be invoked. */
> + static double ldexp (double x, int exponent) { abort (); return 0.0; }The comment and "abort" are fine of course, but won't the "return 0.0" cause some compilers to issue bogus warnings about X and EXPONENT not being used? That's why I had the "x + exponent" in there.
