Bug#201658: gcc-3.3: unjustified warning for C89 code using HUGE_VAL
On Thu, Jul 17, 2003 at 02:21:02AM +0000, Adam M. Costello wrote:
> There is nothing remotely suspicious about the code that would deserve a
> warning; it is entirely C89 conformant. Presumably math.h (or something
> included by it) needs a tweak in its #if directives.
> There might be other symbolic constants with the same problem; I haven't
> searched for them.
My copy of bits/huge_val.h does this:
# define HUGE_VAL (__extension__ 0x1.0p2047)
That code is not c89, but legal in gcc, and the warning would be legitimate,
except that I think __extension__ should be suppressing it.