Obsoleting pow10

[Joseph Myers]

What do people think of obsoleting the pow10 / pow10f / pow10l functions 
(making them into compat symbols, no longer declared or documented, etc.), 
given that there are standard exp10 names for those functions (and the 
exp10 and pow10 functions were added at the same symbol version)?  This 
slightly simplifies moving to the new wrapper templates in the 
!LIBM_SVID_COMPAT case, by avoiding needing to arrange for pow10, pow10f 
and pow10l to be defined by those templates (which deliberately avoid 
defining pow10f128).

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com