>> 1. frexp.c is not needed, as Visual Studio already provides frexp()
>> function via system libraries.
>But probably with bugs. And even if it is not needed on your platform,
>it is part of the tarball to replace broken frexp() on systems where it
>is buggy. Part of configure determines
Hi Kees,
> 1. frexp.c is not needed, as Visual Studio already provides frexp()
> function via system libraries.
The configure log says:
checking whether frexp works... guessing no
...
checking whether frexpl works... guessing no
Why "guessing"? Apparently AC_RUN_IFELSE refuses to run the
t
Hi Bruno,
Thanks for reply.
>> 1. frexp.c is not needed, as Visual Studio already provides frexp()
>> function via system libraries.
...
>Do you have data that shows that MSVC14's frexp() behaves better than the one
>in MSVC 9?
Do you have advice how I can check this quickly? Visual Stu
