Re: assume 'long double'

[Paul Eggert]

Bruno Haible <address@hidden> writes:

>   - autoconf can probably mark the AC_TYPE_LONG_DOUBLE macro as "obsolescent".

Thanks for the suggestion.  I installed this into Autoconf:

2007-04-06  Paul Eggert  <address@hidden>

        * doc/autoconf.texi (Particular Types): AC_C_LONG_DOUBLE is now
        obsolescent.  Suggested by Bruno Haible.
        * NEWS: Document this.

Index: doc/autoconf.texi
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/autoconf/autoconf/doc/autoconf.texi,v
retrieving revision 1.1141
diff -u -p -r1.1141 autoconf.texi
--- doc/autoconf.texi   29 Mar 2007 22:25:18 -0000      1.1141
+++ doc/autoconf.texi   7 Apr 2007 05:54:20 -0000
@@ -5959,6 +5959,9 @@ exists.
 If the C compiler supports a working @code{long double} type, define
 @code{HAVE_LONG_DOUBLE}.  The @code{long double} type might have the
 same range and precision as @code{double}.
+
+This macro is obsolescent, as current C compilers support @code{long
+double}.  New programs need not use this macro.
 @end defmac

 @defmac AC_TYPE_LONG_DOUBLE_WIDER
Index: NEWS
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/autoconf/autoconf/NEWS,v
retrieving revision 1.425
diff -u -p -r1.425 NEWS
--- NEWS        28 Feb 2007 00:03:33 -0000      1.425
+++ NEWS        7 Apr 2007 05:54:20 -0000
@@ -14,6 +14,13 @@
 ** For portability with the eventual M4 2.0, macros should no longer use
    anything larger than $9 to refer to arguments.

+** AC_C_LONG_DOUBLE is obsolescent.
+  The documentation now says that AC_C_LONG_DOUBLE is obsolescent: it
+  tests for problems that are so old that it is no longer of practical
+  importance on current systems.  New programs need not use
+  AC_C_LONG_DOUBLE.  We have no current plans to remove it.
+
+
 * Major changes in Autoconf 2.61a (2006-12-11)

 ** AC_FUNC_FSEEKO was broken in 2.61; it didn't make fseeko and ftello visible