diff options
| author | Paul A. Clarke <pc@us.ibm.com> | 2022-04-11 11:18:28 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Paul A. Clarke <pc@us.ibm.com> | 2022-04-25 09:49:24 -0500 |
| commit | 235f88dbc3494c49e0f361a5a3f78491f72ff47c (patch) | |
| tree | e067f815166eb5fd7bcfe732da920ee51b945110 /gcc/fortran | |
| parent | 362e2a9c6297203bcf7f66bfb51dffb82b42d3b3 (diff) | |
| download | gcc-235f88dbc3494c49e0f361a5a3f78491f72ff47c.zip gcc-235f88dbc3494c49e0f361a5a3f78491f72ff47c.tar.gz gcc-235f88dbc3494c49e0f361a5a3f78491f72ff47c.tar.bz2 | |
docs: Fix 'modff' reference in extend.texi
In commit a2a919aa501e3 (2003), built-ins for modf and modff were added.
In extend.texi, section "Other Builtins", "modf" was added to the paragraph
"There are also built-in versions of the ISO C99 functions [...]" and
"modf" was also added to the paragraph "The ISO C90 functions [...]".
"modff" was not added to either paragraph.
Based on the context clues about where "modfl" and other similar function
pairs like "powf/powl" appear, I believe the reference to "modf" in the
first paragraph (C99) should instead be "modff".
2022-04-25 Paul A. Clarke <pc@us.ibm.com>
gcc
* doc/extend.texi (Other Builtins): Correct reference to 'modff'.
Diffstat (limited to 'gcc/fortran')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions