In commit a2a919aa501e3 (2003), built-ins for modf and modff were added.
In extend.texi, section "Other Builtins", "modf" was added to the paragraph
"There are also built-in versions of the ISO C99 functions [...]" and
"modf" was also added to the paragraph "The ISO C90 functions [...]".
"modff" was not added to either paragraph.
Based on the context clues about where "modfl" and other similar function
pairs like "powf/powl" appear, I believe the reference to "modf" in the
first paragraph (C99) should instead be "modff".
2022-04-11 Paul A. Clarke <p...@us.ibm.com>
gcc
* doc/extend.texi (Other Builtins): Correct reference to 'modff'.
---
gcc/doc/extend.texi | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/doc/extend.texi b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
index e10b10bc1f14..05c99f4284a6 100644
--- a/gcc/doc/extend.texi
+++ b/gcc/doc/extend.texi
@@ -13460,7 +13460,7 @@ There are also built-in versions of the ISO C99
functions
@code{expl}, @code{fabsf}, @code{fabsl}, @code{floorf}, @code{floorl},
@code{fmodf}, @code{fmodl}, @code{frexpf}, @code{frexpl}, @code{ldexpf},
@code{ldexpl}, @code{log10f}, @code{log10l}, @code{logf}, @code{logl},
-@code{modfl}, @code{modf}, @code{powf}, @code{powl}, @code{sinf},
+@code{modfl}, @code{modff}, @code{powf}, @code{powl}, @code{sinf},
@code{sinhf}, @code{sinhl}, @code{sinl}, @code{sqrtf}, @code{sqrtl},
@code{tanf}, @code{tanhf}, @code{tanhl} and @code{tanl}
that are recognized in any mode since ISO C90 reserves these names for
--
2.27.0
