Vincent Lefevre wrote:
On 2005-03-10 01:01:18 +0100, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote:
No. I mean when I call powi() either through built-ins or appropriate
overload (several programming languages do so), I expect sane semantics.
What is powi()? I couldn't find it in the C standard. It isn't
in the Linux man pages either.
;) It's just a new builtin that we have in mainline, very useful for
implementing
the integer power overloads mandated by the C++ standard.
Paolo.
- Re: [OT] __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Duncan Sands
- Re: [OT] __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Robert Dewar
- Re: [OT] __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Geert Bosch
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Duncan Sands
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Paolo Carlini
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Paolo Carlini
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Paolo Carlini
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Vincent Lefevre
- Re: __builtin_cpow((0,0),(0,0)) Gabriel Dos Reis