------- Comment #10 from ghazi at gcc dot gnu dot org  2008-04-15 01:36 -------
(In reply to comment #8)
> I propose that we do the following:
>  - add a warning to the C/C++ frontends that isinf (x) CMP isinf (y) is
>    only well-defined for !isinf (x) && !isinf (y).
> this doesn't result in a runtime penalty and informs people about the possible
> problem in their code (it is non-portable).

IMHO the above warning would have limited coverage because there are other ways
users can test the results of isinf that would run into the sign problem.

> A different workaround would be to canonicalize the return value of isinf to
> bool.

Doesn't this change the interface defined by c99?


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35509

Reply via email to