Andreas Schwab <schwab <at> suse.de> writes: > > Eric Blake <ebb9 <at> byu.net> writes: > > > Most C89 compilers these days provide long double at least as an > > extension, > > long double is not an extension. Did you mistake it with long long? Indeed. A closer look at C89 requires 'long double'. Therefore, AC_TYPE_LONG_DOUBLE should always succeed. Meanwhile, I'm wondering if AC_TYPE_LONG_DOUBLE_WIDER has a bug - there are some platforms (OpenBSD 4.0 and BeOS, for example), where <float.h> is buggy, and the information about 'long double' is copied from the information about 'double', even though 'long double' really is a wider type. So on those platforms, AC_TYPE_LONG_DOUBLE_WIDER may be coming up with the wrong answer because of the buggy header. -- Eric Blake _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
