Re: Adding isinfl() and isnanl()
Joel Sherrill <[email protected]> Thu, 5 Feb 2026 18:53:12 -0600
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.newlib |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAF9ehCWaCZ5ZgSO6EmgNgVG+fwLd9qBCku=U_jAv54L=m0qCQA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Thu, Feb 5, 2026 at 9:28 AM Corinna Vinschen <[email protected]> wrote: > On Feb 5 09:09, Joel Sherrill wrote: > > Hi > > > > math.h:123 has isinfl () and isnanl() as this: > > > > 123 > > < > https://sourceware.org/git?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=blob;f=newlib/libc/include/math.h;h=5e92d2662da145cabad51e5946051aa34e9092b6;hb=HEAD#l123 > > > > #ifdef __CYGWIN__ /* not implemented in newlib yet */ > > 124 > > < > https://sourceware.org/git?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=blob;f=newlib/libc/include/math.h;h=5e92d2662da145cabad51e5946051aa34e9092b6;hb=HEAD#l124 > > > > extern int isinfl (long double); > > 125 > > < > https://sourceware.org/git?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=blob;f=newlib/libc/include/math.h;h=5e92d2662da145cabad51e5946051aa34e9092b6;hb=HEAD#l125 > > > > extern int isnanl (long double); > > 126 > > < > https://sourceware.org/git?p=newlib-cygwin.git;a=blob;f=newlib/libc/include/math.h;h=5e92d2662da145cabad51e5946051aa34e9092b6;hb=HEAD#l126 > > > > #endif > > > > The winsup implementation has them as simple wrappers for the > > corresponding built-in functions such as __builtin_isinf_sign(). > > > > If I copied the winsup/ implementation and put each in a new file > > in newlib/libm so they are always available, is that OK? > > Barring other problems, you should just move them out of winsup into > newlib. > > > If so, any suggestions on location inside libm for simple wrappers > > for the corresponding builtin? > > libm/common > > > What would the conditional guard need to be? Just Cygwin and RTEMS? > > or more? > > I think this would have to be target cpu dependent. > > > Anything I am missing? > > Is it a safe bet that these builtins are available as inline functions > on all supported target cpus and compilers? Unimplemented builtins just > point to their corresponding C lib function, isn't it? > Thanks. This one comment makes me want to avoid doing this. I can easily test the ~15 RTEMS architectures but that leaves a lot I can't easily check. I will see if the code using this can be done a different way. Suggestions on that? --joel > > > Corinna > >