> If so we could remove the whole hypot() stuff...
Maybe not! I don't have a copy of the C89 std here, and web searches turn
up conflicting claims. My favorite C89 web site:
http://www-ccs.ucsd.edu/c/
does not list hypot among the C89 functions. It's definitely required in
C99. To play it safe, I expect we need to keep our own hypot after all.
Would still be nice to simplify this Mac-ish part of pyport.h:
#ifndef HAVE_HYPOT
extern double hypot(double, double);
#ifdef MWERKS_BEFORE_PRO4
#define hypot we_dont_want_faulty_hypot_decl
#endif
#endif
#ifndef HAVE_HYPOT
#ifdef __MWERKS__
#undef hypot
#endif
#endif
While we're at it, shame Barry into cleaning this up <wink>:
#ifdef __NeXT__
#ifdef __sparc__
/*
* This works around a bug in the NS/Sparc 3.3 pre-release
* limits.h header file.
* 10-Feb-1995 bwarsaw@cnri.reston.va.us
*/
#undef LONG_MIN
#define LONG_MIN (-LONG_MAX-1)
#endif
#endif
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4