https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82170
--- Comment #3 from Paul Eggert <eggert at gnu dot org> --- (In reply to Marc Glisse from comment #2) > Note that n==(int)n (gcc documents that this must work) may work with more > gcc versions and is more readable. Thanks, good point, I'll suggest switching to that in glibc, and will update the attachements accordingly. Still, the point remains that the portable code should compile to something just as efficient as 'n == (int) n', which is not portable.
