Mercurial > octave
diff m4/acinclude.m4 @ 21945:e9765b62d4e8
Use C++11 standard complex trig functions when available (bug #44310, bug #45507)
* acinclude.m4 (OCTAVE_CHECK_FUNC_COMPLEX): New macro.
* configure.ac: Use it to test for complex variants of trig and hyperbolic
functions.
* lo-mappers.cc (octave::math::acos, octave::math::asin, octave::math::atan):
Use standard library functions when available.
* lo-specfun.cc (octave::math::acosh, octave::math::asinh, octave::math::atanh):
Likewise.
* mappers.cc: Add BIST tests for affected functions.
| author | Mike Miller <mtmiller@octave.org> |
|---|---|
| date | Fri, 17 Jun 2016 14:24:27 -0700 |
| parents | aba2e6293dd8 |
| children | a2c29df93df7 |
line wrap: on
line diff
--- a/m4/acinclude.m4 Fri Jun 17 16:51:09 2016 -0400 +++ b/m4/acinclude.m4 Fri Jun 17 14:24:27 2016 -0700 @@ -320,6 +320,34 @@ fi ]) dnl +dnl Check whether a complex-valued function is available in <complex>. +dnl Will define HAVE_COMPLEX_STD_FUNC if the function is available in the +dnl std namespace and is callable on both std::complex<double> and +dnl std::complex<float>. The return type of the function is expected to +dnl be of the same std::complex<T> type. +dnl +AC_DEFUN([OCTAVE_CHECK_FUNC_COMPLEX], [ + ac_safe=`echo "$1" | $SED 'y% ./+-:=%___p___%'` + + AC_CACHE_CHECK([for std::$1 in <complex>], + [octave_cv_func_complex_std_$ac_safe], + [AC_LANG_PUSH(C++) + AC_COMPILE_IFELSE([AC_LANG_PROGRAM([[ + #include <complex> + ]], [[ + std::complex<double> z = std::$1 (std::complex<double> (1.0, 1.0)); + std::complex<float> c = std::$1 (std::complex<float> (1.0, 1.0)); + ]])], + [eval "octave_cv_func_complex_std_$ac_safe=yes"], + [eval "octave_cv_func_complex_std_$ac_safe=no"]) + AC_LANG_POP(C++) + ]) + if eval "test \"`echo '$octave_cv_func_complex_std_'$ac_safe`\" = yes"; then + AC_DEFINE(AS_TR_CPP([[HAVE_COMPLEX_STD_][$1]]), 1, + [Define to 1 if <complex> provides std::$1(std::complex<T>).]) + fi +]) +dnl dnl Check whether Qscintilla has version 2.6.0 or later dnl FIXME: This test uses a version number. It potentially could dnl be re-written to actually call the function, but is it worth it?