From: Paul Eggert Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2026 18:27:52 +0000 (-0800) Subject: Better terminology for ‘long double’ in manual X-Git-Tag: glibc-2.43~52 X-Git-Url: http://git.ipfire.org/cgi-bin/gitweb.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=a4669376d0ce5954d82f022f6894bb63e24f3cc9;p=thirdparty%2Fglibc.git Better terminology for ‘long double’ in manual * manual/math.texi (Mathematical Constants): Don’t say that long double is “the same as” double, as the types remain distinct (problem reported by Keith Thompson). Also, don’t imply that float is the “narrowest”, as floating point types don’t have widths in Standard C. Instead, talk about precision and exponent range. --- diff --git a/manual/math.texi b/manual/math.texi index fbabf37b48..fd7284953d 100644 --- a/manual/math.texi +++ b/manual/math.texi @@ -48,10 +48,10 @@ versions are from the numeric extensions to C included in @w{ISO C99}. Which of the three versions of a function should be used depends on the situation. For most calculations, the @code{float} functions are the fastest. On the other hand, the @code{long double} functions have the -highest precision. @code{double} is somewhere in between. It is -usually wise to pick the narrowest type that can accommodate your data. -Not all machines have a distinct @code{long double} type; it may be the -same as @code{double}. +most precision and exponent range. @code{double} is somewhere in between. +It is usually wise to pick the smallest type that can accommodate your data. +On some machines @code{long double} has no more precision or exponent +range than @code{double}, though the types remain distinct for type checking. @Theglibc{} also provides @code{_Float@var{N}} and @code{_Float@var{N}x} types. These types are defined in @w{ISO/IEC TS