On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 11:57, Nathaniel Shead <nathanielosh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 10:30 PM Jonathan Wakely <jwak...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 at 11:23, Nathaniel Shead via Libstdc++ > > <libstd...@gcc.gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > > The comments on PR79700 mentioned that it was somewhat ambiguous whether > > > these functions were supposed to exist for C++11 or not. I chose to add > > > them there, since other resources (such as cppreference) seem to think > > > that C++11 should be the standard these functions were introduced, and I > > > don't know of any reason to do otherwise. > > > > > > Tested on x86_64-linux. > > > > Thanks for the patch, but this needs tests for the new declarations > > (which are tedious to write, which is the main reason I haven't > > already pushed my own very similar patch). > > > > Ah OK, fair enough. Where should the tests go? The only tests I could > find for the existing (non -f/l) functions was just tests for their > existence in testsuite/26_numerics/headers/cmath/functions_std_c++17.cc > which I just added the new functions to - I guess I'll add a new file > here and test that all the functions can be called and give the same > results as the relevant overloaded variants?
Yeah, that sounds great, thanks!
