newlib vs C99 math functions

[Jeff Johnston]

mwoehlke wrote:
> Jeff Johnston wrote:
> 
>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 03:49:01PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote:
>>>
>>>> Christopher Faylor wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Aug 10, 2006 at 02:35:44PM -0500, mwoehlke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Andrew Pinski wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> While porting some code over to use newlib from a closed source 
>>>>>>> libc,
>>>>>>> I ran into the problem of that newlib did not implement most of the
>>>>>>> C99 math functions or macros.  I ran into the problem that FP_ILOGB0
>>>>>>> was not defined and I was wondering if anyone is working on 
>>>>>>> adding any
>>>>>>> of the C99 math functions to newlib?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also is there a bug system for newlib because it would be great to
>>>>>>> file bugs about the problems I ran into.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> Andrew Pinski
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Well, newlib's printf() does not support "%a"/"%A" which are 
>>>>>> required by C99, so my observation of the C99 support at least is 
>>>>>> "spotty at best".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Meanwhile, I'll wait anxiously to see you get any more attention 
>>>>>> from the 'official' folks than I've gotten so far.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> I apologize for getting used to the promptness of Cygwin's list. 
>>>> This one *does* seems dead by comparison.
>>>>
>>>> Now that we know you're here, do you know if anyone is working on 
>>>> adding C99-conformance to newlib? ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think that newlib has a roadmap.  Any changes would come from
>>> either contributions or talking very nicely to Jeff.  Since newlib isn't
>>> Jeff's full-time job, I would imagine that adding major new
>>> functionality won't be high on his to-do list.
>>
>>
>> This seems as good a place to jump in as any now that I am back from 
>> my vacation.
> 
> 
> Ah, that explains why only Dave and CGF answered me... WB! Have a good 
> time? :-)
> 
>> 2. There is no roadmap in place to be fully C99
>>    or POSIX-compliant.  Newlib is still targetted at
>>    embedded systems with a minimal set of syscalls.  That
>>    said, I have no problem with adding C99 and POSIX features
>>    to newlib that are helpful in getting more applications to run.
>>    I recently added hex floating-point support to strtod for
>>    example.
> 
> 
> "Hex floating point support"... would that be the inverse of "%a"/"%A"? ;-)
> 
> In the mean time, would you be receptive if someone (me) took on 
> overhauling the existing documentation system? (See the thread I FW'd 
> here from cygwin-talk, "Re: What's wrong with *roff, anyway?".
>

I don't see a posting with the subject you have quoted.  Could you 
possibly resend it or refer me to the original message?  I replied to 
your other question about where to update printf documentation.

> I'll omit further comment as I seem to have commandeered this thread 
> from its original purpose. :-) Further discussion to one of the threads 
> I started, please!
>