John H Palmieri wrote:
On Apr 18, 1:00 am, David Kirkby <david.kir...@onetel.net> wrote:
On 18 April 2010 06:00, Minh Nguyen <nguyenmi...@gmail.com> wrote:
The C macro INFINITY is apparently defined by the C99 standard. On
Solaris they take a strict interpretation of this and only define it
conditionally:
#if defined(_STDC_C99) || _XOPEN_SOURCE - 0 >= 600 || defined(__C99FEATURES__)
I've not tried it, but if the library wants to use c99 features, it
should add the -std=c99 option.
Right, you said this on the relevant trac ticket, but the author and
reviewer there didn't do anything about it.
Yes. Despite me pointing out some stuff proposed in the ticket was C99, and so
needed the C99 option to gcc, I was ignored.
I hope Minh's build,
which uses this option, continues successfully. (With this change,
things continue to work okay on Mac OS X and on sage.math, at least.)
Meanwhile,
If Ming posts this bug as a ticket, I guess someone else better review it other
than me. Should be quite an easy one to review though.
I do wonder if the whole of the Sage library should be built C99. I'm not sure
how it works if some parts are, and other parts are not. I could imagine that
might have the potential to have some undesirable side effects. Perhaps it is
better to build it all C99. Of course, that would need a lot of testing, but in
the long run it might be better.
I'm trying to figure out why I can't build Sage 4.3.5, let
alone 4.4.alpha0, on t2...
I've not tried to build 4.3.5. I'll try 4.4.alpha0.
Dave
--
To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URL: http://www.sagemath.org
