On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 11:33:12AM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 06:35:55PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Yes, it is - there's a complex type although I believe you're supposed
> > to have to include to get it.
> How can I find more about complex.h? There seems to be contr
On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 11:33:12AM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 06:35:55PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Yes, it is - there's a complex type although I believe you're supposed
> > to have to include to get it.
> How can I find more about complex.h? There seems to be cont
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 06:35:55PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> > > So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> > > don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> > > "_
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > The second problem seems to be one of policy. I get a warning:
> > In file included from /usr/include/math.h:33,
> > from lufactor.c:37:
> > /usr/include/bits/huge_val.h:37: warning: HUGE_VAL' redefined
> > machine.h:216: w
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 06:35:55PM +, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> > > So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> > > don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> > > "
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > The second problem seems to be one of policy. I get a warning:
> > In file included from /usr/include/math.h:33,
> > from lufactor.c:37:
> > /usr/include/bits/huge_val.h:37: warning: HUGE_VAL' redefined
> > machine.h:216:
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> > don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> > "__complex__" via complex.h, but that's different to just defining
> > "
>
> So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> "__complex__" via complex.h, but that's different to just defining
> "complex", isn't it? Any ideas?
>
>
I seem to recall something about co
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:29:12AM -0800, Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
> > So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> > don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> > "__complex__" via complex.h, but that's different to just defining
> >
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:20:34PM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> In file included from /usr/include/math.h:33, from lufactor.c:37:
> /usr/include/bits/huge_val.h:37: warning: HUGE_VAL' redefined
> machine.h:216: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
>
> Meschach header file matri
>
> So the problem seems to be some conflict over the name "complex", but I
> don't understand what the conflict is exactly. gcc supports the keyword
> "__complex__" via complex.h, but that's different to just defining
> "complex", isn't it? Any ideas?
>
>
I seem to recall something about c
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 11:20:34PM +1100, Drew Parsons wrote:
> In file included from /usr/include/math.h:33, from lufactor.c:37:
> /usr/include/bits/huge_val.h:37: warning: HUGE_VAL' redefined
> machine.h:216: warning: this is the location of the previous definition
>
> Meschach header file matr
12 matches
Mail list logo
