------- Comment #5 from joseph at codesourcery dot com 2009-08-26 18:59 ------- Subject: Re: [4.5 regression] libgfortran fails to build on Solaris 10+: '_Imaginary_I' undeclared
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, ro at techfak dot uni-bielefeld dot de wrote: > I don't have access to either an HP-UX or AIX system, but there may be an > additional complication on Solaris 2 and IRIX 6: unlike e.g. glibc and > maybe HP-UX and/or AIX, both systems define both _Complex_I and > _Imaginary_I and I in terms of the latter. I'm not certain if we can just > throw the _Imaginary_I/imaginary definitions away and use > > #define _Complex_I (__extension__ 1.0iF) > > instead or we must/should maintain the imaginary related definitions. > There seems to be some discussion around having removed > imaginary/_Imaginary_I in C99 TC2, but I'm not sure what the resolution > was. There is no use in keeping definitions relating to imaginary types when GCC doesn't implement them, and the uses of imaginary types are extremely limited (as far as I can tell, they are only useful for building up complex values with exact control of infinities, NaNs and signed zeros in each component). -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=41169
