On 10 July 2017 at 15:06, Alexandre Julliard julliard@winehq.org wrote:
Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com writes:
On 10 July 2017 at 13:54, Henri Verbeet hverbeet@gmail.com wrote:
My understanding was asinh() is C89, while asinhf() and asinhl() are C99.
Although looking at the actual standard, I don't see asinh() in there.
In general we don't care about the standards. Saying "asinh is in C89 so it's guaranteed to be available" doesn't make sense, nothing is guaranteed. There may or may not be a system out there that doesn't have it, no matter what the standards say.
Sure, although at this point I'd have to wonder about the number of systems that don't conform to C89 and we still care about.
The reason I looked it up though, is simply because the man page I have is indeed ambiguous about whether asinh() is in C89 or in C99, and I was curious. It wasn't necessarily meant as an argument either for or against the actual patch.